You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> on 2018/09/01 08:07:38 UTC
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Hi Peter,
any opinion on this one?
Or should I set the "release blocker" flag in bugzilla for that purpose?
Regards,
Matthias
Am 29.08.2018 um 18:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 29.08.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> This is a configuration thing. In general I do not have an issue in adding configuration changes to bugfix releases.
>> However this one is 16 years old and has been requested in another time and context.
>>
>> I think we should ask the community if they like it or not. And since we want to have some interaction with the community in 4.2.0, I think this is more suited in 4.2.0 release then in 4.1.6.
> +1 for testing it in trunk. We should be careful about what we commit to
> 4.1.6.
>
> But let's talk about the commits we want to backport from trunk.
>
> My first suggestion would be:
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1830998
>
> This is just a small patch that installs XSLT Sample Filters by default
> on Windows (like on all other platforms).
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>> Am 28. August 2018 23:12:35 MESZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>:
>>> On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
>>>> This patch could be embedded in this release?
>>> I'm not the release manager, so this is just a personal opinion. The
>>> patch swaps the behaviour of two keys (Backspace and Del) and thus
>>> shouldn't be applied to a 4.1.x release since it is only for bugfixes,
>>> and actually only for important bugfixes.
>>>
>>> But it can be added to trunk (for the next 4.2.0 release) already now.
>>> We may want to note it in the Release Notes for 4.2.0 when the time
>>> comes.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrea.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 09/09/2018 Matthias Seidel wrote:
> But I know that Andrea wanted to ask for a blocker, but we hadn't
> enabled the flag at that time.
It worked now: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127712
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
On 9/10/2018 2:56 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Keith N. McKenna <
> keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna <ke...@comcast.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
>>>>>> releases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6
>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
>>>>> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
>>>>>> (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to
>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo
>>>>>> AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone
>> can
>>>>>> always modify the query.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HTH.
>>>>> Kay;
>>>>>
>>>>> I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
>>>>> 4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
>>>>> have set it as shared.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dang! I was sure I'd done that but maybe I didn't save it correctly.
>> I'll
>>>> fix tomorrow and notify the list.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> <snip)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> HI. Please try the search link again, hopefully it will work now. You
>> need
>>> to be a registered BZ user to view it.
>>>
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
>>> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
>>>
>>>
>> Kay;
>>
>> The new link is truncated in your message and gives a list that is
>> limited to 500 entries. However the search know shows in the preferences
>> as being there and usable and works perfectly.
>>
>> Keith
>>
>
> Keith --
> When I look at the message I originally sent with the link, the line is not
> wrapped. Could a setting with your email client be causing the
> wrapping/truncation?
>
> The query should only return 9 entries.
>
>
>
I meant the link in the message that you had fixed it.
Keith
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Keith N. McKenna <
keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna <ke...@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> <snip>
> >>>>
> >>>> I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
> >>>> releases.
> >>>>
> >>>> I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6
> --
> >>>>
> >>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
> >>> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
> >>>> (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to
> >>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo
> >>>> AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone
> can
> >>>> always modify the query.
> >>>>
> >>>> HTH.
> >>> Kay;
> >>>
> >>> I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
> >>> 4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
> >>> have set it as shared.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Keith
> >>>
> >>
> >> Dang! I was sure I'd done that but maybe I didn't save it correctly.
> I'll
> >> fix tomorrow and notify the list.
> >>
> >
> >>
> >>> <snip)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> > HI. Please try the search link again, hopefully it will work now. You
> need
> > to be a registered BZ user to view it.
> >
> > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
> > list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
> >
> >
> Kay;
>
> The new link is truncated in your message and gives a list that is
> limited to 500 entries. However the search know shows in the preferences
> as being there and usable and works perfectly.
>
> Keith
>
Keith --
When I look at the message I originally sent with the link, the line is not
wrapped. Could a setting with your email client be causing the
wrapping/truncation?
The query should only return 9 entries.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Less is MORE."
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna <ke...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
>>>> releases.
>>>>
>>>> I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
>>>>
>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
>>> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
>>>> (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo
>>>> AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone can
>>>> always modify the query.
>>>>
>>>> HTH.
>>> Kay;
>>>
>>> I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
>>> 4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
>>> have set it as shared.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>>
>> Dang! I was sure I'd done that but maybe I didn't save it correctly. I'll
>> fix tomorrow and notify the list.
>>
>
>>
>>> <snip)
>>>
>>>
>>>
> HI. Please try the search link again, hopefully it will work now. You need
> to be a registered BZ user to view it.
>
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
>
>
Kay;
The new link is truncated in your message and gives a list that is
limited to 500 entries. However the search know shows in the preferences
as being there and usable and works perfectly.
Keith
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna <ke...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> >
>> > I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
>> > releases.
>> >
>> > I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
>> >
>> > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
>> list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
>> > (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
>> >
>> > Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo
>> > AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone can
>> > always modify the query.
>> >
>> > HTH.
>> Kay;
>>
>> I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
>> 4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
>> have set it as shared.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>
> Dang! I was sure I'd done that but maybe I didn't save it correctly. I'll
> fix tomorrow and notify the list.
>
>
>> <snip)
>>
>>
>>
HI. Please try the search link again, hopefully it will work now. You need
to be a registered BZ user to view it.
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&
list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Less is MORE."
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna <ke...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
> > releases.
> >
> > I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
> >
> >
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
> > (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
> >
> > Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo
> > AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone can
> > always modify the query.
> >
> > HTH.
> Kay;
>
> I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
> 4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
> have set it as shared.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
Dang! I was sure I'd done that but maybe I didn't save it correctly. I'll
fix tomorrow and notify the list.
> <snip)
>
>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
<snip>
>
> I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
> releases.
>
> I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
>
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
> (I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
>
> Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to https://bz.apache.org/ooo
> AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone can
> always modify the query.
>
> HTH.
Kay;
I just tried tried your query and it came back as "The search named
4.1.6_blocker_requested does not exist." It does not appear that you
have set it as shared.
Regards
Keith
<snip)
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi all --
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.seidel@hamburg.de
> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> > Okay I had a look now.
> >
> > I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
> >
> > I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
> >
> > Are these all of them?
>
> I don't know your list, can you post the issue numbers?
> Or just the filter string?
>
> >
> >
> > - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
> > note the issue number. :(
> >
> >
> > Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
> > still to add from the dev list?
>
> I have a lot of them, but they do not qualify as blocker.
> But I know that Andrea wanted to ask for a blocker, but we hadn't
> enabled the flag at that time.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
releases.
I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
(I didn't do this for 4.1.5 but for many of the previous releases.)
Hopefully this will work once you are logged in to https://bz.apache.org/ooo
AND hopefully the same ones Peter has referenced. Of course someone can
always modify the query.
HTH.
> >
> > All the best
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> >> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
> >> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
> >> And then off we go, I Think.
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
> >> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
> >> is moving to 4.2.0.
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
> >> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
> >>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
> >>> whether it really is one or not ;)
> >>>
> >>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
> >>>
> >>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
> >>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Jim,
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> >>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
> >>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
> >>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
> >>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
> >>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
> >>>> Definitely!
> >>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
> >>>>
> >>>> How to proceed?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Matthias
> >>>>
> >>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
> >>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Andrea,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> >>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
> >>>>>>>> How about this one:
> >>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
> >>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
> >>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
> >>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
> >>> wouldn't
> >>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
> >>> and
> >>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
> >>> understand
> >>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
> >>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
> >>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
> >>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
> >>> newer
> >>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
> >>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
> >>> finally
> >>>>>> find its way into a release.
> >>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>> Matthias
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>> Andrea.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> <ma...@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
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Less is MORE."
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay I had a look now.
>
> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>
> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>
> Are these all of them?
I don't know your list, can you post the issue numbers?
Or just the filter string?
>
>
> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
> note the issue number. :(
>
>
> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
> still to add from the dev list?
I have a lot of them, but they do not qualify as blocker.
But I know that Andrea wanted to ask for a blocker, but we hadn't
enabled the flag at that time.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> All the best
>
> Peter
>
> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>
>>
>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>
>>
>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>
>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>
>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>> Definitely!
>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>
>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>> and
>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>> understand
>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>> newer
>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>> finally
>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> <ma...@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
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Thats right :)
> On Sep 15, 2018, at 4:07 AM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>
> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>
> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>
> At least this is my understanding...
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>>
>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>
>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>
>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>>>>
>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> All the best
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <le...@posteo.de>.
+1
On 9/16/18 10:21 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Am 16.09.2018 um 22:08 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
>>
>> should we change milestone now too?
> I did for one issue (already committed)
> But the other one hasn't 4.1.6 in the list.
>
> @Marcus:
> Maybe you can help (again)?
>
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
>
>>
>> On 9/16/18 10:02 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
>>>> release blocker?
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>
>>> According to Marcus I could grant them myself.
>>> And I could commit them to 4.1.6, they are really small fixes.
>>>
>>>> On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
>>>>>> worked them through.
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> You left two requests (from me) open...
>>>>> Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>>>>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>>>>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>>>>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>>>>>>> "relman"
>>>>>>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> have sufficient rights...
>>>>>>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>>>>>>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I
>>>>>>>>>>>> have to
>>>>>>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>>>>>>>>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RM on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 16.09.2018 um 22:08 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
>
> should we change milestone now too?
I did for one issue (already committed)
But the other one hasn't 4.1.6 in the list.
@Marcus:
Maybe you can help (again)?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
>
>
> On 9/16/18 10:02 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
>>> release blocker?
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>
>> According to Marcus I could grant them myself.
>> And I could commit them to 4.1.6, they are really small fixes.
>>
>>> On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
>>>>> worked them through.
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> You left two requests (from me) open...
>>>> Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>>>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>>>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>>>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>>>>>> "relman"
>>>>>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I
>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>> have sufficient rights...
>>>>>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>>>>>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I
>>>>>>>>>>> have to
>>>>>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>>>>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>>>>>>>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have
>>>>>>>>>>>> now. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> RM on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community
>>>>>>>>>>>>> build
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <le...@posteo.de>.
Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
should we change milestone now too?
On 9/16/18 10:02 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
>> release blocker?
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>
> According to Marcus I could grant them myself.
> And I could commit them to 4.1.6, they are really small fixes.
>
>> On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>>>>
>>>> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>>>>
>>>> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
>>>> worked them through.
>>> Thanks!
>>> You left two requests (from me) open...
>>> Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>>>>> "relman"
>>>>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I
>>>>>> don't
>>>>>> have sufficient rights...
>>>>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>>>>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I
>>>>>>>>>> have to
>>>>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>>>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>>>>>>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I
>>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> RM on
>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, it
>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
> release blocker?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
According to Marcus I could grant them myself.
And I could commit them to 4.1.6, they are really small fixes.
>
> On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>>>
>>> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>>>
>>> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
>>> worked them through.
>> Thanks!
>> You left two requests (from me) open...
>> Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>>>> "relman"
>>>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>>>
>>>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I
>>>>> don't
>>>>> have sufficient rights...
>>>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>>>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I
>>>>>>>>> have to
>>>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>>>>>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I
>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the
>>>>>>>>>>> RM on
>>>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, it
>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a release
blocker?
On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>>
>> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>>
>> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
>> worked them through.
> Thanks!
> You left two requests (from me) open...
> Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>>> "relman"
>>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>>
>>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
>>>> have sufficient rights...
>>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>>
>>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I
>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>
> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>
> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
> worked them through.
Thanks!
You left two requests (from me) open...
Maybe because they are already fixed (in trunk)?
Regards,
Matthias
>
> On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>>
>>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>>
>>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>>> "relman"
>>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>>
>>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
>>> have sufficient rights...
>>
>> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
>> with the correct user names. ;-)
>>
>> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I
>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many
>>>>>>>>> patches and
>>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <le...@posteo.de>.
Awesome! thanks a lot.
+ I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
worked them through.
On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>
>>> At least this is my understanding...
>>
>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group "relman"
>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>
>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
>> have sufficient rights...
>
> I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
> with the correct user names. ;-)
>
> Please check for yourself if it's working now.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I
>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>>>>>>>>>>>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>>>>>>>>>>>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>>>>>>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>
>> At least this is my understanding...
>
> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group "relman"
> in our Bugzilla?!
>
> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
> have sufficient rights...
I've added Matthias and Peter to the "relman" group in BZ. Hopefully
with the correct user names. ;-)
Please check for yourself if it's working now.
Marcus
>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>
>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> All the best
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 15.09.2018 um 20:25 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> I do not have those rights. Probably because my bugzilla user is an account. I tried to switch to my apache address but I failed.
> The account name is an leginee account at Google mail service.
Your account must be added to the appropriate groups. See:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release
I don't have the rights, so someone else has to do it.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Am 15. September 2018 10:34:31 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>> Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>>
>>> At least this is my understanding...
>> That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>> "relman"
>> in our Bugzilla?!
>>
>> I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
>> have sufficient rights...
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>> reports.
>>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have
>> to
>>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>> wants
>>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>> forward.
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want
>> to
>>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>> else
>>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM
>> on
>>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>> that
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>> for
>>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>> make
>>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches
>> and
>>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases,
>> it
>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>> zero-risk
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>> compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>> or a
>>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>> would
>>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org>.
I do not have those rights. Probably because my bugzilla user is an account. I tried to switch to my apache address but I failed.
The account name is an leginee account at Google mail service.
Am 15. September 2018 10:34:31 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
>> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>>
>> At least this is my understanding...
>
>That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group
>"relman"
>in our Bugzilla?!
>
>I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
>have sufficient rights...
>
>Matthias
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>>
>>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6
>reports.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have
>to
>>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone
>wants
>>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move
>forward.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> All the best
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want
>to
>>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one
>else
>>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM
>on
>>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO
>that
>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build
>for
>>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to
>make
>>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches
>and
>>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases,
>it
>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is
>zero-risk
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new
>compiler)
>>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE,
>or a
>>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that
>would
>>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>
> At least this is my understanding...
That said, can someone please ensure that Peter is in the group "relman"
in our Bugzilla?!
I would have a look myself but as I wrote several times before I don't
have sufficient rights...
Matthias
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>>
>>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>>
>>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>>>>
>>>> Are these all of them?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>>> still to add from the dev list?
>>> There are more to come... ;-)
>>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> All the best
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
At least this is my understanding...
Regards,
Matthias
>
> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Okay I had a look now.
>>>
>>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>>
>>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>>>
>>> Are these all of them?
>>>
>>>
>>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>>> note the issue number. :(
>>>
>>>
>>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>>> still to add from the dev list?
>> There are more to come... ;-)
>> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> All the best
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that
>>>>>>> they
>>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>>>> newer
>>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>>> finally
>>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <le...@posteo.de>.
Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Okay I had a look now.
>>
>> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>>
>> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>>
>> Are these all of them?
>>
>>
>> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
>> note the issue number. :(
>>
>>
>> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
>> still to add from the dev list?
> There are more to come... ;-)
> If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>> All the best
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>>
>>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
>>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>>
>>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>>> and
>>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>>> understand
>>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>>> newer
>>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>>> finally
>>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@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
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay I had a look now.
>
> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>
> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>
> Are these all of them?
>
>
> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
> note the issue number. :(
>
>
> Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
> still to add from the dev list?
There are more to come... ;-)
If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> All the best
>
> Peter
>
> On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
>> add one patch concerning mailmerge.
>> And then off we go, I Think.
>>
>>
>> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
>> series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
>> is moving to 4.2.0.
>>
>>
>> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
>> <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>
>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>>
>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
>>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>> Definitely!
>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>
>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>>> and
>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>>> understand
>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>>> newer
>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>>> finally
>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> <ma...@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
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <le...@posteo.de>.
Okay I had a look now.
I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
Are these all of them?
- The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to note
the issue number. :(
Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
still to add from the dev list?
All the best
Peter
On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to add one patch concerning mailmerge.
> And then off we go, I Think.
>
>
> I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else is moving to 4.2.0.
>
>
> Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>> whether it really is one or not ;)
>>
>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>> Hi Jim,
>>>
>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
>> can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>> older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>> 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>> fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>> Definitely!
>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>
>>> How to proceed?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
>> <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>> wouldn't
>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>> and
>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>> understand
>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>> newer
>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>> finally
>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> <ma...@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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to add one patch concerning mailmerge.
And then off we go, I Think.
I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else is moving to 4.2.0.
Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
>whether it really is one or not ;)
>
>BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>
>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
><ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
>can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
>older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
>4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
>fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>
>> Definitely!
>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>
>> How to proceed?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>>
>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
><ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
>wouldn't
>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
>and
>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
>understand
>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>
>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
>newer
>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
>finally
>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
><ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
><ma...@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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 07.09.2018 um 14:53 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I am going to hold off until we have some stuff in AOO416, other than external lib upgrades, which are different from AOO415
I just wanted to do test builds to see if it builds again after some
patches broke the build process...
No problems at the moment.
>
>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 2:30 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06.09.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it really is one or not ;)
>>>
>>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>> Windows builds (based on r1839814) are up:
>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-416-Test/
>>
>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>>> Definitely!
>>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>>
>>>> How to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
>>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I am going to hold off until we have some stuff in AOO416, other than external lib upgrades, which are different from AOO415
> On Sep 6, 2018, at 2:30 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>
> Am 06.09.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it really is one or not ;)
>>
>> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
>
> Windows builds (based on r1839814) are up:
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-416-Test/
>
>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jim,
>>>
>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
>>> Definitely!
>>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>>
>>> How to proceed?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
>>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@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: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 06.09.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it really is one or not ;)
>
> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
Windows builds (based on r1839814) are up:
https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-416-Test/
>
>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
>> Definitely!
>> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>>
>> How to proceed?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>>
>>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
>>>> find its way into a release.
>>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it really is one or not ;)
BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
>
> Definitely!
> We already have some release blocker asked for.
>
> How to proceed?
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>>
>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>
>>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> How about this one:
>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>>
>>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>>>> Windows release... just an example)
>>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>>
>>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
>>> find its way into a release.
>>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andrea.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Jim,
Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
Definitely!
We already have some release blocker asked for.
How to proceed?
Regards,
Matthias
>
>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> How about this one:
>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>>
>>> In general, release blockers should be:
>>> - important bugfixes for users
>>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>>> Windows release... just an example)
>> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>>
>> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
>> find its way into a release.
>> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrea.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for those users.
> On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrea,
>
> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> How about this one:
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>>
>> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
>> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
>> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
>> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
>> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>>
>> In general, release blockers should be:
>> - important bugfixes for users
>> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
>> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
>> Windows release... just an example)
>
> This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
>
> It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
> find its way into a release.
> There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Andrea,
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> How about this one:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>
> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
>
> In general, release blockers should be:
> - important bugfixes for users
> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
> Windows release... just an example)
This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would finally
find its way into a release.
There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Andrea,
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> How about this one:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>
> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
> maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't
> make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and
> (unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand
> if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
My idea would be to create another flag in Bugzilla for patches that do
not qualify as "blocker" but would be "nice to have"...
Regards,
Matthias
>
> In general, release blockers should be:
> - important bugfixes for users
> - important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
> - important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
> Windows release... just an example)
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Matthias Seidel wrote:
> How about this one:
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
> It fixes a typo in the build process.
This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a maintenance
release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't make sense to
include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk and (unfortunately)
4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I understand if we try to
backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
In general, release blockers should be:
- important bugfixes for users
- important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
- important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a newer
Windows release... just an example)
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 01.09.2018 um 12:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Sorry. I thought I send the answer. Yes Please.
Done!
How about this one:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
It fixes a typo in the build process.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Am 1. September 2018 10:07:38 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> any opinion on this one?
>> Or should I set the "release blocker" flag in bugzilla for that
>> purpose?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>>
>> Am 29.08.2018 um 18:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> Am 29.08.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> This is a configuration thing. In general I do not have an issue in
>> adding configuration changes to bugfix releases.
>>>> However this one is 16 years old and has been requested in another
>> time and context.
>>>> I think we should ask the community if they like it or not. And
>> since we want to have some interaction with the community in 4.2.0, I
>> think this is more suited in 4.2.0 release then in 4.1.6.
>>> +1 for testing it in trunk. We should be careful about what we commit
>> to
>>> 4.1.6.
>>>
>>> But let's talk about the commits we want to backport from trunk.
>>>
>>> My first suggestion would be:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1830998
>>>
>>> This is just a small patch that installs XSLT Sample Filters by
>> default
>>> on Windows (like on all other platforms).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>>> Am 28. August 2018 23:12:35 MESZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti
>> <pe...@apache.org>:
>>>>> On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
>>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
>>>>>> This patch could be embedded in this release?
>>>>> I'm not the release manager, so this is just a personal opinion.
>> The
>>>>> patch swaps the behaviour of two keys (Backspace and Del) and thus
>>>>> shouldn't be applied to a 4.1.x release since it is only for
>> bugfixes,
>>>>> and actually only for important bugfixes.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it can be added to trunk (for the next 4.2.0 release) already
>> now.
>>>>> We may want to note it in the Release Notes for 4.2.0 when the time
>>>>> comes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
Sorry. I thought I send the answer. Yes Please.
Am 1. September 2018 10:07:38 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>Hi Peter,
>
>any opinion on this one?
>Or should I set the "release blocker" flag in bugzilla for that
>purpose?
>
>Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
>
>Am 29.08.2018 um 18:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Am 29.08.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> This is a configuration thing. In general I do not have an issue in
>adding configuration changes to bugfix releases.
>>> However this one is 16 years old and has been requested in another
>time and context.
>>>
>>> I think we should ask the community if they like it or not. And
>since we want to have some interaction with the community in 4.2.0, I
>think this is more suited in 4.2.0 release then in 4.1.6.
>> +1 for testing it in trunk. We should be careful about what we commit
>to
>> 4.1.6.
>>
>> But let's talk about the commits we want to backport from trunk.
>>
>> My first suggestion would be:
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1830998
>>
>> This is just a small patch that installs XSLT Sample Filters by
>default
>> on Windows (like on all other platforms).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> Am 28. August 2018 23:12:35 MESZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti
><pe...@apache.org>:
>>>> On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
>>>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
>>>>> This patch could be embedded in this release?
>>>> I'm not the release manager, so this is just a personal opinion.
>The
>>>> patch swaps the behaviour of two keys (Backspace and Del) and thus
>>>> shouldn't be applied to a 4.1.x release since it is only for
>bugfixes,
>>>> and actually only for important bugfixes.
>>>>
>>>> But it can be added to trunk (for the next 4.2.0 release) already
>now.
>>>> We may want to note it in the Release Notes for 4.2.0 when the time
>>>> comes.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andrea.
>>>>
>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org