You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> on 2012/08/15 14:02:21 UTC
[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
in OpenOffice.
This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
final release based on this snapshot build.
This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
further languages:
(1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
http://s.apache.org/Huv.
(2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
following wiki page:
hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
(incubating).
The vote starts now and will be open until:
Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
members.
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
[ ] 0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Sylvain DENIS <sy...@gmail.com>.
+1
Librement,
Sylvain DENIS
*EducOOo Administrator
Spécialiste TIC, FLOSS & WEB*
*RSRSi (Responsable Sécurité et Risques des Systèmes d'information)***
2012/8/18 Wolf Halton <wo...@gmail.com>
> +1
>
> Wolf Halton
>
> http://sourcefreedom.com
> Apache developer:
> wolfhalton@apache.org
> On Aug 16, 2012 4:38 PM, "Kay Schenk" <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> > > OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> > > after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> > > deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> > > help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> > > in OpenOffice.
> > >
> > > This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> > > candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> > > one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> > > voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> > > final release based on this snapshot build.
> > >
> > >
> > > This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> > > further languages:
> > > (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> > > http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> > > (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> > > Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> > >
> > > For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
> > > .
> > >
> > >
> > > The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> > > releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> > > review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> > > following wiki page:
> > >
> > > hhttps://
> > >
> >
> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> > >
> > >
> > > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> > > (incubating).
> > >
> > > The vote starts now and will be open until:
> > >
> > > Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> > >
> > > After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> > > general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
> > hours.
> > > But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
> like
> > > to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> > > members.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> > > [ ] 0 Don't care
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >
> >
> > +1 from me on this release
> >
> > I tested Linux 32-bit, and reviewed and tested fixes per your list.
> >
> > Linyi Li's automation testing report was also pretty solid for Linux 32
> >
> > I am disappointed that I can not assist more with Base testing (jdbc
> > functionality), and I am working on a way to do that.
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
> >
> --
> > Niels Bohr
> >
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Wolf Halton <wo...@gmail.com>.
+1
Wolf Halton
http://sourcefreedom.com
Apache developer:
wolfhalton@apache.org
On Aug 16, 2012 4:38 PM, "Kay Schenk" <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> > OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> > after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> > deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> > help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> > in OpenOffice.
> >
> > This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> > candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> > one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> > voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> > final release based on this snapshot build.
> >
> >
> > This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> > further languages:
> > (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> > http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> > (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> > Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> >
> > For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
> > .
> >
> >
> > The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> > releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> > review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> > following wiki page:
> >
> > hhttps://
> >
> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> >
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> > (incubating).
> >
> > The vote starts now and will be open until:
> >
> > Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> >
> > After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> > general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
> hours.
> > But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> > to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> > members.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> > [ ] 0 Don't care
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
>
> +1 from me on this release
>
> I tested Linux 32-bit, and reviewed and tested fixes per your list.
>
> Linyi Li's automation testing report was also pretty solid for Linux 32
>
> I am disappointed that I can not assist more with Base testing (jdbc
> functionality), and I am working on a way to do that.
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
> --
> Niels Bohr
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
> .
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://
> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1 from me on this release
I tested Linux 32-bit, and reviewed and tested fixes per your list.
Linyi Li's automation testing report was also pretty solid for Linux 32
I am disappointed that I can not assist more with Base testing (jdbc
functionality), and I am working on a way to do that.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
--
Niels Bohr
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Reizinger Zoltán <zr...@hdsnet.hu>.
2012.08.15. 14:02 keltezéssel, Jürgen Schmidt írta:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Zoltan
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 11:50 +0200, Andre Fischer wrote:
> On 15.08.2012 14:02, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> > OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> > after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> > deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> > help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> > in OpenOffice.
> >
> > This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> > candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> > one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> > voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> > final release based on this snapshot build.
> >
> >
> > This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> > further languages:
> > (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> > http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> > (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> > Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> >
> > For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
> >
> >
> > The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> > releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> > review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> > following wiki page:
> >
> > hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> >
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> > (incubating).
> >
> > The vote starts now and will be open until:
> >
> > Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> >
> > After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> > general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> > But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> > to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> > members.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> > [ ] 0 Don't care
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
>
> +1
>
> In a fresh VirtualBox of Ubuntu 12.04 64bit I did:
>
> - Download the source tarball and verified its signature.
>
> - Configured and built it.
>
> - Installed it.
>
> - Did some short tests.
>
>
> Everything OK.
>
>
-0
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 15.08.2012 14:02, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1
In a fresh VirtualBox of Ubuntu 12.04 64bit I did:
- Download the source tarball and verified its signature.
- Configured and built it.
- Installed it.
- Did some short tests.
Everything OK.
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2012/8/15 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
+1 for release.
I'm using the 64 bits Linux binary on my daily tasks and everything
looks perfect.
Ricardo
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
[X] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
IPMC VOTE.
Regards,
Dave
On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
2012/8/15 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
> .
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://
> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1
Installed zh-CN version on Windows, worked on both ODF and MS Office format
by loading/saving/editing/printing/converting with no problem.
Noticed some minor defects on installer for file association and
translation, will submit to BZ. But they are not regression and not release
blocker.
- Shenfeng
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
+1
In retrospect we probably should have created a separate
[VOTE][DISCUSS] thread to make it easier to find the real votes.
Something for next time...
I posted my test results earlier, mainly trying various install and
upgrade scenarios. I know this was a source of pain for some with AOO
3.4.0 so I thought it could use an extra look. I didn't find any
problems.
Today I downloaded the source tar.gz for the Release Candidate and
built it on a new Ubuntu 10.04 LTS VM. I have a few things that I'll
add to the Building Guide based on my experience, but overall it was
quite smooth. I'm not exactly a guru Linux programmer. If I can
figure this out then anyone can.
Good work, all!
Regards,
-Rob
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 15.08.2012 14:02, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
- using Windows binary package for daily work since it is available
- downloaded source package
- configured and built source package on Windows 7. See attachment for the
output of <bootstrap> command - you will not find any download from our SVN
repository.
- installed and tested result of source package build
-- run the smoketest
-- checked pre-registered extensions
-- checked printing in Writer
--> everything ok.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> @Rob, do we have any statistics about download numbers of the src release?
>
>From Google Analytics I see:
aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2 2,073
aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz 1,148
aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip 620
But I assume most developers who are serious about the source code
would check it out directly from Subversion. I don't have numbers for
that.
As we know there have been over 11 million downloads of the binaries
in this same time period (since May). I assume the ratio would be
similar for other end-user facing open source projects, like Firefox,
7-ZIP, etc. But projects that are developer-oriented, delivering
libraries, probably have a different ratio, one that has a larger
proportion of source downloads.
-Rob
> Juergen
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/12 1:48 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>
>> Dave,
>>
>> Did you see this page:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-buildflags
>>
>> That has the build steps and flags used for the binaries we'll be
>> releasing. There is no single "right way" to build AOO. There are
>> variations that will enable or disable various optional features. But
>> if you want the same thing as what is in the release, the above link
>> has the info you want.
>
> This should be linked to from the source package README and also on the 4 build mwiki pages that are linked to from the source.
For now yes but in the future I would change the README to link to the
new AOO Building Guide and would link to the used flags for our binary
builds from there.
>
> I won't know until tomorrow because my cpan config is broken and I now need LWP::UserAgent to download the external dependencies.
>
what exactly is your problem Dave, I am sure we can help you. It seems
that we have a lot of room for improvements to insert further checks
etc. and to update the documentation.
@Rob, do we have any statistics about download numbers of the src release?
Juergen
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>
>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>
>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>
>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>
>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>
>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>
>
> Dave,
>
> Did you see this page:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-buildflags
>
> That has the build steps and flags used for the binaries we'll be
> releasing. There is no single "right way" to build AOO. There are
> variations that will enable or disable various optional features. But
> if you want the same thing as what is in the release, the above link
> has the info you want.
This should be linked to from the source package README and also on the 4 build mwiki pages that are linked to from the source.
I won't know until tomorrow because my cpan config is broken and I now need LWP::UserAgent to download the external dependencies.
Regards,
Dave
>
> -Rob
>
>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>
>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>> further languages:
>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>
>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>
>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>
>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>
>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>> members.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>
>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>
>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>
>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>
> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>
> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>
Dave,
Did you see this page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-buildflags
That has the build steps and flags used for the binaries we'll be
releasing. There is no single "right way" to build AOO. There are
variations that will enable or disable various optional features. But
if you want the same thing as what is in the release, the above link
has the info you want.
-Rob
> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>
> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>
>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>
>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>> further languages:
>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>
>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>
>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>> (incubating).
>>>>
>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>
>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>
>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>> members.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 4:31 PM, TJ Frazier wrote:
> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>
>>
>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>> have a different opinion.
>>
>> -Rob
>
> Rob,
>
> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
Yes, this was one of the ways that the evolution in what is meant by official releases. It is also allowing for more pragmatic consumption of other licenses in convenience binaries. This may (or may not) be related to the Oracle vs. Google case.
Regards,
Dave
>
> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
> /tj/
>>
>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:27 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:06 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>> >>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>> >>>>> Builds?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>> >>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>> >>>>> clear what is current.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>> >>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>> >>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>> >>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>> >>>>
>> >>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>> >>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>> >>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>> >>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>> >>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>> >>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>> >>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>> >>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>> >>> have a different opinion.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Rob,
>> >>
>> >> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
>> >> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
>> >> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>> >>
>> >
>> > Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
>> > both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
>> > wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
>> > or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
>> > discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
>> >
>> > Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
>> > source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
>> > application, something no other Apache project has previously
>> > attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
>> > long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
>> > fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
>> > public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
>> > can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
>> > this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
>> >
>> > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
>> >
>> > So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
>> > they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
>> > than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
>> > Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
>> > Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
>> > "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
>> > absolutely false.
>>
>> Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
>>
>> At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
>>
>> We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
>>
>> We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
>>
>> Does that help?
>
> NO
>
> The ASF stands behind the actual binary release as official or not, it
> is not a niggling point in my mind. What does that mean - it means that
> a binary will be kept available (not just the source), it means that a
> security fix is not released if it is in source only, for a package that
> has been previously released in binary form, not as a convenience but
> has a duty.
>
Maybe a good way to look at this is:
1) Fundamental Apache principles include The Apache Way as well as the
Apache License. Like any other open source license, ALv2 is grounded
on copyright. Copyright is grounded on the creative expression of
authors. So with computer programs this puts the source code (and
documentation and art work) in a central position of importance. Our
work to carefully track the source code, where it comes from,
collecting iCLA's, adding NOTICE and LICENSE files, this is all geared
to clarifying the copyright and license of the source code. The source
code *is* the program. The source code is where the rights of users
come from. This is true even for users who only touch the binaries.
So as a project we always need to have a proper degree of respect for
the source code, NOTICE and LICENSE, and associated build instructions
that allow the project (and in this case the IPMC) to verify that the
source code is complete.
2) The IPMC uses the term "canonical" to express the status of the
source code in a release:
"The source package is canonical. Every release must revolve around a
source package. Compiled languages may also wish to create binary
packages. These may be platform specific."
I think "canonical" is a good term to use, accurate and unlikely to be
misinterpreted or cause offense.
3) Referring to binaries as being for "mere convenience" expresses a
developer- or admin-centric view that is appropriate for the majority
of Apache projects. In those cases the binaries are for convenience
only, since their audience of users has the requisite skills to build
the software from source. A little reflection would suggest this is
unlikely to be true for all projects and all users. Threshold
question might be to ask whether your mother could build your project.
Or a 10 year old in school. Or a public administrator. For
OpenOffice, for millions of users, the binaries are not merely a
convenience.
4) Similarly, "unofficial" might accurately reflect the status of
binaries for some Apache projects. For example, Subversion does not
issues official binaries at all. Instead they link to unofficial 3rd
party distributions, ports, etc. We've talked about listing
unofficial releases as well, e.g., for Solaris, OS/2, BSD,
portableApps, etc. But this is a different beast. It is not the
status of a release that is built, voted on and released by the
project.
I think it is important that we distinguish between common practice
based on common circumstances and Apache policy. Not everything that
other projects do is mandated by policy. Not everything that most or
all other projects do is mandated by policy. Some things are merely
conventional, based on circumstances, but where variation within
policy is permissible. Being the first Apache project to have a
predominately end-user audience means that we will need to continue to
point out this distinction.
Regards,
-Rob
>
>
> //drew
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> >> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
>> >> /tj/
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Regards,
>> >>>> Dave
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>> >>>>> Dave
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>> >>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>> >>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Hi all,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>> >>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>> >>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>> >>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>> >>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
>> >>>>>>> confidence
>> >>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
>> >>>>>>> release
>> >>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
>> >>>>>>> latest
>> >>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>> >>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>> >>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>> >>>>>>> further languages:
>> >>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>> >>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>> >>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>> >>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>> >>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>> >>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>> >>>>>>> following wiki page:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>> >>>>>>> (incubating).
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>> >>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
>> >>>>>>> hours.
>> >>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
>> >>>>>>> like
>> >>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>> >>>>>>> members.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>> >>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> >>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:06 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> >> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
> >>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
> >>>>> Builds?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
> >>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
> >>>>> clear what is current.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
> >>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
> >>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
> >>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
> >>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
> >>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
> >>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
> >>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
> >>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
> >>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
> >>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
> >>> have a different opinion.
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>
> >>
> >> Rob,
> >>
> >> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
> >> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
> >> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
> >>
> >
> > Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
> > both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
> > wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
> > or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
> > discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
> >
> > Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
> > source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
> > application, something no other Apache project has previously
> > attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
> > long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
> > fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
> > public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
> > can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
> > this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
> >
> > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
> >
> > So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
> > they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
> > than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
> > Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
> > Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
> > "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
> > absolutely false.
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
>
> At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
>
> We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
>
> We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
>
> Does that help?
NO
The ASF stands behind the actual binary release as official or not, it
is not a niggling point in my mind. What does that mean - it means that
a binary will be kept available (not just the source), it means that a
security fix is not released if it is in source only, for a package that
has been previously released in binary form, not as a convenience but
has a duty.
//drew
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
> >> /tj/
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Dave
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks & Regards,
> >>>>> Dave
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
> >>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
> >>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> >>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> >>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> >>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> >>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
> >>>>>>> confidence
> >>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
> >>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
> >>>>>>> latest
> >>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> >>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> >>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> >>>>>>> further languages:
> >>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> >>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> >>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> >>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> >>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> >>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> >>>>>>> following wiki page:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> >>>>>>> (incubating).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> >>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
> >>>>>>> hours.
> >>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
> >>>>>>> like
> >>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> >>>>>>> members.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> >>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> >>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 8/16/12 5:08 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 6:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>>>>>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>>>>>>>> Builds?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>>>>>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>>>>>>>> clear what is current.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>>>>>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>>>>>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>>>>>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>>>>>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>>>>>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>>>>>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>>>>>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>>>>>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>>>>>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>>>>>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>>>>>> have a different opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
>>>>> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
>>>>> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
>>>> both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
>>>> wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
>>>> or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
>>>> discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
>>>>
>>>> Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
>>>> source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
>>>> application, something no other Apache project has previously
>>>> attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
>>>> long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
>>>> fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
>>>> public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
>>>> can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
>>>> this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
>>>>
>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
>>>>
>>>> So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
>>>> they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
>>>> than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
>>>> Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
>>>> Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
>>>> "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
>>>> absolutely false.
>>>
>>> Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
>>>
>>
>> The phrase "convenience binary" does not exist anywhere on the IPMC website.
>>
>> What is said is "Many would argue that for open source projects, the
>> source package is the release: binaries are just for convenience."
>>
>> But "Many would say" does not a policy make. The same page also says
>> of binaries, "For some projects, this makes sense. For others, it does
>> not."
>>
>>> At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
>>>
>>
>> The IPMC will be voting for the the release of source and binaries.
>> This includes verifying that the LICENSE and NOTICE in the binaries
>> are correct. If you recall we had a delay in our first release due to
>> errors in these files in the binaries. If we were not voting for
>> them, and if they were not official, then we would not have needed to
>> fix and rebuild before voting. I've seen the same occur in other
>> projects, where the binaries where JAR's.. So even from the IPMC
>> perspective there are properties of the binaries that require
>> verification and which have policy implication.
>>
>>
>>> We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
>>>
>>
>> In the end a vote means what it says. If the vote says we are voting
>> to release binaries as well as source then we are voting to release
>> both. if anyone feels the wording of the vote violates IPMC or ASF
>> policy then they should object.
>>
>>
>>> We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
>>>
>>
>> The only uses of "official" and "unofficial" in the IPMC's release
>> documentation supports the view that our binaries are part of the
>> official release.
>>
>> IPMC and Branding policy does back up the view that downstream builds,
>> not built by or voted on by the PMC, and not distributed by Apache,
>> are "unofficial". But that is not what we're dealing with here.
>>
>>> Does that help?
>>>
>>
>> I think I understand what you believe, but I don't think what you say
>> is an accurate reflection of current IPMC or ASF policy. It appears
>> to me that you are inventing a new category of "unofficial release"
>> that has no basis in current documentation. I'd recommend just
>> dropping that term, or working with the IPMC to get consensus on what
>> that means and what ramifications that has in terms of policy. But as
>> far as I can see the binaries require the same review, the same vote
>> and the same distribution and signing requirements as the source. So
>> inventing artificial categories, unsubstantiated by policy, will only
>> further alienate a community that is quite proud of the public good
>> brought by the binaries we have released for over 10 years prior to
>> Apache and which we have continued to do this this date, and be used
>> as FUD by those outside of the project. I assume that is not your
>> intent, so best to just drop this.
>
> This has been a good discussion. What I really want to address are three issues:
>
> (1) Clear build instructions that can be mechanically verified that are part of the source release.
The build instructions can be always improved and we can of course do it
better. Especially consolidating the available information but all this
requires time and resources.
I have updated the linked wiki page to guide users to the current AOO
Building Guide that Andre has already mentioned.
The next step will be to update the README and link to the current
building guide.
Feedback how to improve the building guide is always welcome or simply
do it directly.
And of course if you have such huge problems why not simply starting a
new thread asking detailed questions and give feedback what exactly is
missing and what can be improved.
>
> (2) Digitally signing binary artifacts mechanically by infrastructure from these build instructions. A requirement for apache.org certificates.
of course this will be added to the building guide when we know how the
final process will look like. We will probably have to tweak the process
a little bit because currently we use a pfx file containing the
certificate. By the way a very flexible way to exchange the certificate
on demand.
Juergen
>
> (3) An Incubator and/or ASF policy that unambiguously describes what defines an official binary release.
>
> (4) This might include a way that a third party like FreeBSD might certify a build as Apache OpenOffice.
>
> But we don't need to do it here for 3.4.1. I'll likely take it up as a future when the VOTE goes to general@, but my VOTE won't depend on this build, this time.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 6:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>>>>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>>>>>>> Builds?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>>>>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>>>>>>> clear what is current.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>>>>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>>>>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>>>>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>>>>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>>>>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>>>>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>>>>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>>>>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>>>>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>>>>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>>>>> have a different opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rob,
>>>>
>>>> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
>>>> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
>>>> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
>>> both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
>>> wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
>>> or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
>>> discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
>>>
>>> Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
>>> source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
>>> application, something no other Apache project has previously
>>> attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
>>> long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
>>> fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
>>> public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
>>> can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
>>> this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
>>>
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
>>>
>>> So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
>>> they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
>>> than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
>>> Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
>>> Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
>>> "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
>>> absolutely false.
>>
>> Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
>>
>
> The phrase "convenience binary" does not exist anywhere on the IPMC website.
>
> What is said is "Many would argue that for open source projects, the
> source package is the release: binaries are just for convenience."
>
> But "Many would say" does not a policy make. The same page also says
> of binaries, "For some projects, this makes sense. For others, it does
> not."
>
>> At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
>>
>
> The IPMC will be voting for the the release of source and binaries.
> This includes verifying that the LICENSE and NOTICE in the binaries
> are correct. If you recall we had a delay in our first release due to
> errors in these files in the binaries. If we were not voting for
> them, and if they were not official, then we would not have needed to
> fix and rebuild before voting. I've seen the same occur in other
> projects, where the binaries where JAR's.. So even from the IPMC
> perspective there are properties of the binaries that require
> verification and which have policy implication.
>
>
>> We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
>>
>
> In the end a vote means what it says. If the vote says we are voting
> to release binaries as well as source then we are voting to release
> both. if anyone feels the wording of the vote violates IPMC or ASF
> policy then they should object.
>
>
>> We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
>>
>
> The only uses of "official" and "unofficial" in the IPMC's release
> documentation supports the view that our binaries are part of the
> official release.
>
> IPMC and Branding policy does back up the view that downstream builds,
> not built by or voted on by the PMC, and not distributed by Apache,
> are "unofficial". But that is not what we're dealing with here.
>
>> Does that help?
>>
>
> I think I understand what you believe, but I don't think what you say
> is an accurate reflection of current IPMC or ASF policy. It appears
> to me that you are inventing a new category of "unofficial release"
> that has no basis in current documentation. I'd recommend just
> dropping that term, or working with the IPMC to get consensus on what
> that means and what ramifications that has in terms of policy. But as
> far as I can see the binaries require the same review, the same vote
> and the same distribution and signing requirements as the source. So
> inventing artificial categories, unsubstantiated by policy, will only
> further alienate a community that is quite proud of the public good
> brought by the binaries we have released for over 10 years prior to
> Apache and which we have continued to do this this date, and be used
> as FUD by those outside of the project. I assume that is not your
> intent, so best to just drop this.
This has been a good discussion. What I really want to address are three issues:
(1) Clear build instructions that can be mechanically verified that are part of the source release.
(2) Digitally signing binary artifacts mechanically by infrastructure from these build instructions. A requirement for apache.org certificates.
(3) An Incubator and/or ASF policy that unambiguously describes what defines an official binary release.
(4) This might include a way that a third party like FreeBSD might certify a build as Apache OpenOffice.
But we don't need to do it here for 3.4.1. I'll likely take it up as a future when the VOTE goes to general@, but my VOTE won't depend on this build, this time.
Regards,
Dave
>
> -Rob
>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
>>>> /tj/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
>>>>>>>>> confidence
>>>>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
>>>>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
>>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>>>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>>>>>> Builds?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>>>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>>>>>> clear what is current.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>>>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>>>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>>>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>>>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>>>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>>>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>>>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>>>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>>>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>>>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>>>> have a different opinion.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob,
>>>
>>> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
>>> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
>>> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>>>
>>
>> Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
>> both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
>> wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
>> or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
>> discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
>>
>> Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
>> source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
>> application, something no other Apache project has previously
>> attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
>> long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
>> fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
>> public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
>> can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
>> this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
>>
>> So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
>> they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
>> than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
>> Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
>> Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
>> "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
>> absolutely false.
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
>
The phrase "convenience binary" does not exist anywhere on the IPMC website.
What is said is "Many would argue that for open source projects, the
source package is the release: binaries are just for convenience."
But "Many would say" does not a policy make. The same page also says
of binaries, "For some projects, this makes sense. For others, it does
not."
> At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
>
The IPMC will be voting for the the release of source and binaries.
This includes verifying that the LICENSE and NOTICE in the binaries
are correct. If you recall we had a delay in our first release due to
errors in these files in the binaries. If we were not voting for
them, and if they were not official, then we would not have needed to
fix and rebuild before voting. I've seen the same occur in other
projects, where the binaries where JAR's.. So even from the IPMC
perspective there are properties of the binaries that require
verification and which have policy implication.
> We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
>
In the end a vote means what it says. If the vote says we are voting
to release binaries as well as source then we are voting to release
both. if anyone feels the wording of the vote violates IPMC or ASF
policy then they should object.
> We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
>
The only uses of "official" and "unofficial" in the IPMC's release
documentation supports the view that our binaries are part of the
official release.
IPMC and Branding policy does back up the view that downstream builds,
not built by or voted on by the PMC, and not distributed by Apache,
are "unofficial". But that is not what we're dealing with here.
> Does that help?
>
I think I understand what you believe, but I don't think what you say
is an accurate reflection of current IPMC or ASF policy. It appears
to me that you are inventing a new category of "unofficial release"
that has no basis in current documentation. I'd recommend just
dropping that term, or working with the IPMC to get consensus on what
that means and what ramifications that has in terms of policy. But as
far as I can see the binaries require the same review, the same vote
and the same distribution and signing requirements as the source. So
inventing artificial categories, unsubstantiated by policy, will only
further alienate a community that is quite proud of the public good
brought by the binaries we have released for over 10 years prior to
Apache and which we have continued to do this this date, and be used
as FUD by those outside of the project. I assume that is not your
intent, so best to just drop this.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
>>> /tj/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
>>>>>>>> confidence
>>>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
>>>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>>>>> Builds?
>>>>>
>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>>>>> clear what is current.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>
>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>
>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>>> have a different opinion.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> Rob,
>>
>> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
>> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
>> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>>
>
> Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
> both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
> wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
> or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
> discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
>
> Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
> source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
> application, something no other Apache project has previously
> attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
> long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
> fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
> public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
> can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
> this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
>
> So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
> they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
> than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
> Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
> Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
> "Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
> absolutely false.
Convenience binary artifacts are released for the benefit of users.
At the most basic level when we VOTE we are approving the source release. We are stating that we understand the License and Copyright of the source and that it is in Policy. This is the standard for the IPMC and an Apache Member. It is not a vote that says that the code even works properly it confirms that it is valid Apache Release.
We, the PPMC, also VOTE that these binary artifacts are of high quality and that they work, but we are relying on others in the project to come up with that in aggregate - none of us have every environment - none of us understand every language. This is a different standard. We are certifying that the source release when built produces these artifacts and that they are useful to users.
We can consider how to treat the word "Official" or "Certified" around platform builds that may be called "Apache OpenOffice" as opposed to "Powered by Apache OpenOffice". This certainly gets into the area of digital signatures which is fast becoming a topic for multiple projects at The ASF. And yes the quality is about the control of the build.
Does that help?
Regards,
Dave
>
> -Rob
>
>> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
>> /tj/
>>
>>>
>>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
>>>>>>> confidence
>>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
>>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still
>>>> pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac
>>>> Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild
>>>> this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very
>>>> clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed
>>>> and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on
>>> the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me
>>> on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>
>>
>> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
>> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
>> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
>> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
>> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
>> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
>> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
>> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
>> have a different opinion.
>>
>> -Rob
>
>
> Rob,
>
> Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to general@inc
> and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries. IMHO, he will
> need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board member ...
>
Current IPMC policy, as documented, states otherwise. ASF practice,
both with TLP's and Podlings, is to release binaries where the PMC
wishes to do so. The general discussion has gone far beyond whether
or not we release binaries or whether they are official. We're now
discussing how rather than whether these binaries can be signed.
Availability of source code is what makes Apache OpenOffice open
source. But the binaries are what make OpenOffice an end user
application, something no other Apache project has previously
attempted. So it is not surprising that this is a challenge to
long-held practices and habits for some Apache members. But this is
fully in accord with the Apache mission to publish software for the
public good. I'd like to think that open minds can see how binaries
can be just as much of a public benefit as source code can be. If
this is not apparent to anyone, I'd recommend a read of this page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mission.html
So again I would ask that we choose our words more carefully, since
they are repeated, out of context, and are ascribed greater authority
than we might intend. For example, I read recently on a European
Commission websiste that a group of French agencies decided not to use
Apache OpenOffice, in part because they were lead to believe that
"Apache...doesn’t deliver installable software (binaries)". This is
absolutely false.
-Rob
> (Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
> /tj/
>
>>
>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain
>>>>>> confidence
>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the
>>>>>> release
>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the
>>>>>> latest
>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com>.
On 8/15/2012 18:52, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>
>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>
>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>
>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>
>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>
>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>
>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>
>
> That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
> policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
> being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
> IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
> talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
> In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
> sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
> on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
> have a different opinion.
>
> -Rob
Rob,
Please consider the blistering email from Roy T. Fielding, to
general@inc and to infra, on 3/27, 05:50, opposing "released' binaries.
IMHO, he will need to change his mind. OTOH, he is a founder and board
member ...
(Sorry for no neat refs; I keep my own archives :-) )
/tj/
>
>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>> further languages:
>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>
>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>
>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>
>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>
>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>> members.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>
>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>
>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>
>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>
> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>
> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>
> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>
That is your opinion, expressed loudly; it is not Apache or IPMC
policy. We are officially voting on binaries as well and these are
being inspected and these will be part of the official release. The
IPMC doc calls the source artifacts "canonical", but the same docs
talk about binaries being included in the official release as well.
In fact, it says of binary packages, "For some projects, this makes
sense. For others, it does not." Obviously you have your own opinion
on this, but it is equally true that the vast majority of PPMC members
have a different opinion.
-Rob
> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>
>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>
>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>> further languages:
>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>
>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>
>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>> (incubating).
>>>>
>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>
>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>
>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>> members.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:57 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>>
>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>
>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>
>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>
>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>
>>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>>
>>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>>
>> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
>>
>
> A citation, please?
You would need to be listening to the evolving conversations on general@ and legal-discuss@
Documentation is always behind that. Sorry.
>
>> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>>
>
> That phrase is also used in the release management guidelines as an
> explanation for why "binary-only" release are not permitted. But the
> same guidelines talk extensively about including binary packages in
> releases.
>
>> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>>
>
> Sure.
>
>> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>>
>
> OK.
>
>> My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
>>
>
> Yes, but please stop with inflammatory statements that have in the
> past been repeated by others, outside of the project, as a source of
> FUD against the project. We really don't need more of this. We all
> care about the source. But let's not diminish the importance or the
> status of the binaries.
No let's not. The BINARIES are VERY IMPORTANT!
But they are not so important that we neglect to help people build from source.
Now, I better eat and get my blood sugar in shape..
Regards,
Dave
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>>
>>> //drew
>>>
>>>>
>>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>
>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>
>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>
> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
>
A citation, please?
> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>
That phrase is also used in the release management guidelines as an
explanation for why "binary-only" release are not permitted. But the
same guidelines talk extensively about including binary packages in
releases.
> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>
Sure.
> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>
OK.
> My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
>
Yes, but please stop with inflammatory statements that have in the
past been repeated by others, outside of the project, as a source of
FUD against the project. We really don't need more of this. We all
care about the source. But let's not diminish the importance or the
status of the binaries.
Regards,
-Rob
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> //drew
>>
>>>
>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>
>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>
>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>
> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
Also this is actually a good distinction and an evolution as it gives possible sanction to stuff like:
(LEGAL-144) Request for permission for CloudStack to distribute secondary convenience builds containing libvirt-java (LGPL)
>
> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>
> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>
> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>
> My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> //drew
>>
>>>
>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 16, 2012, at 4:06 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:
> On 16.08.2012 12:48, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:30:13AM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote:
>>>> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying
>>>> to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested
>>>> the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>>>
>>> 1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think
>>> I remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older
>>> platform specific build instruction pages.
>>>
>>> 2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with
>>> download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists
>>> under this name for more than two months and since it is used in
>>> every setup of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested.
>>> But that does not mean that it is error free.
>>
>> He might have found something similar to this:
>> http://markmail.org/message/pqre775ds3m4y3jg
>
> Hm, I did not perceive this as a persisting problem. It seemed to have a simple solution.
That was exactly the trouble. Somewhere in the build guide this should highlighted under Perl Dependencies. The other part is that it should describe the proper cpan commands.
I basically ended up with my permissions modified on cpan. I fixed this and then I had to upgrade LWP::UserAgent
The building guide needs to be oriented towards a rather neophyte developer.
Already we getting the guides lined up with the README.
>
>>
>> He has LWP::UserAgent but it's too old, a method is missing, so he tries
>> to update the module with cpan. Updating Perl like this may brake other
>> things in your system, I prefer keeping the system as it came, and
>> install a local perl version.
>
> If that is really the problem and updating Perl really is such a problem (I never experienced it as one) then I could try to make the use of LWP::UserAgent more compatible with older versions.
>
> The biggest problem might be to lay hands on such old versions in a running system.
Having clear update LWP::UserAgent instructions for those who don't know cpan would be enough.
Regards,
Dave
>
>>
>> IMO there is no fix for this: we check the perl version, we check the
>> presence of LWP::UserAgent, but: does it make sense to check the
>> LWP::UserAgent version too? Is it possible at all? The perl module does
>> not document when a specific method was introduced, or I least
>> I couldn't find that info in
>> http://search.cpan.org/~gaas/libwww-perl-6.04/lib/LWP/UserAgent.pm there
>> is not such thing as a @since tag.
>
> First we have to identify this as a real problem. Then we (I, you, or anybody else) are certainly able to find a solution. We might even use an alternative to LWP::UserAgent.
>
> -Andre
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 16.08.2012 12:48, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:30:13AM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote:
>>> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying
>>> to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested
>>> the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>>
>> 1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think
>> I remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older
>> platform specific build instruction pages.
>>
>> 2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with
>> download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists
>> under this name for more than two months and since it is used in
>> every setup of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested.
>> But that does not mean that it is error free.
>
> He might have found something similar to this:
> http://markmail.org/message/pqre775ds3m4y3jg
Hm, I did not perceive this as a persisting problem. It seemed to have
a simple solution.
>
> He has LWP::UserAgent but it's too old, a method is missing, so he tries
> to update the module with cpan. Updating Perl like this may brake other
> things in your system, I prefer keeping the system as it came, and
> install a local perl version.
If that is really the problem and updating Perl really is such a problem
(I never experienced it as one) then I could try to make the use of
LWP::UserAgent more compatible with older versions.
The biggest problem might be to lay hands on such old versions in a
running system.
>
> IMO there is no fix for this: we check the perl version, we check the
> presence of LWP::UserAgent, but: does it make sense to check the
> LWP::UserAgent version too? Is it possible at all? The perl module does
> not document when a specific method was introduced, or I least
> I couldn't find that info in
> http://search.cpan.org/~gaas/libwww-perl-6.04/lib/LWP/UserAgent.pm there
> is not such thing as a @since tag.
First we have to identify this as a real problem. Then we (I, you, or
anybody else) are certainly able to find a solution. We might even use
an alternative to LWP::UserAgent.
-Andre
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:30:13AM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote:
> >Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying
> >to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested
> >the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>
> 1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think
> I remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older
> platform specific build instruction pages.
>
> 2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with
> download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists
> under this name for more than two months and since it is used in
> every setup of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested.
> But that does not mean that it is error free.
He might have found something similar to this:
http://markmail.org/message/pqre775ds3m4y3jg
He has LWP::UserAgent but it's too old, a method is missing, so he tries
to update the module with cpan. Updating Perl like this may brake other
things in your system, I prefer keeping the system as it came, and
install a local perl version.
IMO there is no fix for this: we check the perl version, we check the
presence of LWP::UserAgent, but: does it make sense to check the
LWP::UserAgent version too? Is it possible at all? The perl module does
not document when a specific method was introduced, or I least
I couldn't find that info in
http://search.cpan.org/~gaas/libwww-perl-6.04/lib/LWP/UserAgent.pm there
is not such thing as a @since tag.
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 16.08.2012 19:59, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Aug 16, 2012, at 12:30 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:
>
>> On 16.08.2012 00:46, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>>
>>>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>>>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>>>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>>>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>>>
>>>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>>>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>>>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>>>
>>> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
>>>
>>> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>>>
>>> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>>
>> 1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think I remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older platform specific build instruction pages.
>>
>> 2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists under this name for more than two months and since it is used in every setup of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested. But that does not mean that it is error free.
>>
>> 3. Please have a look at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO. Maybe that page is more helpful. If not, please help me to improve it.
>
> That page *IS* much better!
>
> To handle my case it would be good to suggest that a user upgrade their Perl dependencies. That path != install.
What did you do exactly? Something like "install CPAN; reload cpan" ?
>
> As long as the READMEs links get a user to eventually get to this MWiki page that would be great!
I have changed the README (on trunk) to point to the new building guide
and cleaned it up a bit.
I will try to make a clean install on Mac. The problem is to lay hands
on a pristine Mac environment. I recently read that from MacOSX Lion on
it is legal to run a copy of it in a virtual environment on (as long as
that runs on Apple hardware). So I will set up a Mountain Lion VM and
write down what has to be done to build AOO.
-Andre
>[...]
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 16, 2012, at 12:30 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:
> On 16.08.2012 00:46, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>>
>>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>>
>>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>>
>>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>>
>>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>>
>>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>>
>>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>>
>> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
>>
>> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>>
>> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>>
>> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
>
> 1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think I remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older platform specific build instruction pages.
>
> 2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists under this name for more than two months and since it is used in every setup of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested. But that does not mean that it is error free.
>
> 3. Please have a look at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO. Maybe that page is more helpful. If not, please help me to improve it.
That page *IS* much better!
To handle my case it would be good to suggest that a user upgrade their Perl dependencies. That path != install.
As long as the READMEs links get a user to eventually get to this MWiki page that would be great!
A link to a separate page about checking NOTICE, LICENSE and running Rat might be helpful, but that is another thread.
Best Regards,
Dave
>
> -Andre
>
>>
>> My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>>
>>> //drew
>>>
>>>>
>>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 16.08.2012 00:46, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>>
>>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>>
>>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>>
>>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>>
>>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>>
>>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>>
>> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
>> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
>> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
>> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>>
>> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
>> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
>> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
>
> Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
>
> The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
>
> So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
>
> Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
1. LWP::UserAgent has been a prerequisite for years. But I think I
remember that it was temporarily removed from one of the older platform
specific build instruction pages.
2. Can you be more specific regarding your problems with
download_external_dependencies.pl so that I can fix it? It exists under
this name for more than two months and since it is used in every setup
of a build I would say that it is fairly well tested. But that does not
mean that it is error free.
3. Please have a look at
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO. Maybe
that page is more helpful. If not, please help me to improve it.
-Andre
>
> My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> //drew
>>
>>>
>>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>>> further languages:
>>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, drew jensen wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>>>
>>> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>>>
>>> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>>>
>>> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>>
>> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>>
>> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>>
>> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
>
> - but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
> they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
> saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
> this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
>
> That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
> project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
> type of differentiation from earlier projects.
Binary artifacts are fine, they are just considered to be "unofficial convenience artifacts".
The ASF's mission is software for the public good. That means that users must be able to see the source and be able to build it for themselves. They must be able to inspect the source to see that it is unhindered.
So, the IP must be clear and transparently so. This is what an IPMC and ASF Member must measure their vote on.
Sorry, I'm a bit cranky right now. My cpan disappeared while trying to assure that I had the now required LWP::UserAgent. No one tested the new download_external_dependencies.pl properly.
My real message is that the project needs to clean up the build instructions so that special knowledge and/or help is not a prerequisite.
Regards,
Dave
>
> //drew
>
>>
>> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>>>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>>>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>>>> further languages:
>>>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>>>
>>>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>>>> following wiki page:
>>>>>
>>>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>>>> (incubating).
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>>>
>>>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>>>
>>>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>>>> members.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating),
RC2
Posted by drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 14:45 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> > Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
> >
> > Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
> >
> > Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
> >
> > I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
>
> I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
>
> Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
>
> BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
- but I thought that as part of accepting this project ASF was saying
they were open to change.. am I just wrong on that - cause folks keep
saying this as if it is a FACT and I thought it was going to be up to
this project to decide whether binaries are official, or not.
That is what I thought when I cast my non-binding vote to create this
project at ASF - specifically that it was recognized as needing this
type of differentiation from earlier projects.
//drew
>
> (I really don't want to -1 this release.)
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> >> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
> >> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
> >> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
> >>
> >> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> >>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> >>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> >>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> >>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> >>> in OpenOffice.
> >>>
> >>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> >>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> >>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> >>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> >>> final release based on this snapshot build.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> >>> further languages:
> >>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> >>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> >>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> >>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> >>>
> >>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> >>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> >>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> >>> following wiki page:
> >>>
> >>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> >>> (incubating).
> >>>
> >>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
> >>>
> >>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> >>>
> >>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> >>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> >>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> >>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> >>> members.
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> >>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> >>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
>
> Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
>
> Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
>
> I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
I am stuck and I am stopping. I am very unhappy with the instructions on the WIki page. I needed help with 3.4 and now I need help with 3.4.1.
Please show me the simplest way to build on a Mac from Source and show me on the Wiki based on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions
BTW - Remember that SOURCE is the ONLY OFFICIAL RELEASE.
(I really don't want to -1 this release.)
Regards,
Dave
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
>> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
>> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
>> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>>
>> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>>> in OpenOffice.
>>>
>>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>>
>>>
>>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>>> further languages:
>>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>>
>>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>>
>>>
>>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>>> following wiki page:
>>>
>>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>>
>>>
>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>>> (incubating).
>>>
>>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>>
>>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>>
>>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>>> members.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>
>>
>
[DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Is there a reason that the README in the source release is still pointing at http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/MacOSXBuildInstructions for Mac Builds?
Minimally this then points to http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AquaBuild this doesn't seem exactly like what was used for 3.4.0?
Would someone check the Build instructions and then update to be very clear what is current.
I am proceeding with my tests as if the prerequisites have not changed and that I have them from my AOO 3.4 tests build.
Thanks & Regards,
Dave
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> Date: August 15, 2012 7:01:47 AM PDT
> To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
> Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> delivered-to: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>
> Hi,
>
> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>
> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>> in OpenOffice.
>>
>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>
>>
>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>> further languages:
>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>
>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>
>>
>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>> following wiki page:
>>
>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>> (incubating).
>>
>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>
>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>
>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>> members.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>
> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> > OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> > after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> > deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> > help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> > in OpenOffice.
> >
> > This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> > candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> > one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> > voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> > final release based on this snapshot build.
> >
> >
> > This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> > further languages:
> > (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> > http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> > (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> > Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
> >
> > For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
> .
> >
> >
> > The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> > releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> > review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> > following wiki page:
> >
> > hhttps://
> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
> >
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> > (incubating).
> >
> > The vote starts now and will be open until:
> >
> > Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
> >
> > After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> > general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72
> hours.
> > But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> > to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> > members.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> > [ ] 0 Don't care
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
>
>
+1 from me
I don't know how often I have tested and built this release but I am
satisfied now. The RAT scans today costs me some nerves but anyway ....
I did my standard tests on the binaries on MacOS, Windows and Lniux
(64bit). It looked ok to me.
I build the src release on MacOS and used the same switches as for the
brinary release. I repeat this step after I have repackaged the src release.
Well I am a developer and no QA engineer or volunteer tester who have
always a differnet view on these things but for me everything works as
expected.
No downloads of externals from the svn repo ;-)
I am now tired and looking forward to a nice short weekend trip with my
wife.
Juergen
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
>
> On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
>> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
>> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
>> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
>> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
>> in OpenOffice.
>>
>> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
>> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
>> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
>> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
>> final release based on this snapshot build.
>>
>>
>> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
>> further languages:
>> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
>> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
>> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
>> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>>
>> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>>
>>
>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
>> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
>> following wiki page:
>>
>> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>>
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
>> (incubating).
>>
>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>
>> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>>
>> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
>> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>> members.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
>
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Keith McKenna
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
please vote on this email to ooo-dev only, thanks.
On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.
Jürgen Schmidt schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
Kind regards
Regina
[VOTE][RESULT]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
Thanks to Andre who counted the result on Saturday already and started
the IPMC vote for me. I included the additional votes that we received
afterwards as well to express the broader acceptance.
The vote period to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) RC2 has
ended.
The ballot result is +16 including 2 IPMC member binding +1, 14 +1 votes
from PPMC members (this includes the two IPMC member), two +1 vote from
community members.
No abstentions, no -1 votes.
The IPMC vote is ongoing on general@incubator.apache.org
VOTE TALLY
+1 Dave Fisher - IPMC (binding)
+1 Jim Jagielski - IPMC (binding)
+1 Jürgen Schmidt - PPMC
+1 Kay Schenk - PPMC
+1 RGB ES - PPMC
+1 Rob Weir - PPMC
+1 Andre Fischer - PPMC
+1 Regina Henschel - PPMC
+1 Marcus (OOo) - PPMC
+1 Andrea Pescetti - PPMC
+1 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - PPMC
+1 Zoltán Reizinger - PPMC
+1 Kay Schenk - PPMC
+1 Predro Giffuni
+1 Shen Feng Liu
+1 Ji Yan
On 8/15/12 2:02 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 15/08/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
This is based on tests on the binary packages by me and other community
members from the ooo-progetto-it mailing list. Note that it occasionally
happened (during our tests and in users reports about 3.4.0) that the
Windows installation does not start automatically; this is probably
related to other software, but I integrated the "Known Issues" at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes
accordingly, just in case.
Andrea
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
+1
Marcus
Am 08/15/2012 02:02 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache
> OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release
> after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we
> deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again
> help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence
> in OpenOffice.
>
> This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release
> candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest
> one based on revision 1372282 is intended to become released if the
> voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the
> final release based on this snapshot build.
>
>
> This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some
> further languages:
> (1) 71 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under
> http://s.apache.org/Huv.
> (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English,
> Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish.
>
> For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes.
>
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the
> following wiki page:
>
> hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
> (incubating).
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating), RC2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 16, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> Saturday, 18 August: 2012-08-18 2:00pm UTC+2.
>
> After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on
> general@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours.
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating)
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1... (on releasing as "Apache OpenOffice 3.4*.1* (incubating))