You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> on 2014/03/19 00:21:35 UTC
Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and
feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy.
>> It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far.
I'm moving this to an own thread as per Juergen's request (but this IS
release-relevant: I'd like to have more visibility for dev builds in the
weeks leading to 4.1). And I'm leave the snippet above just to say that
"Policy forbids this" is not a killer argument in this case. If the
Apache policy gets in the way, we are probably applying it too
conservatively, and I heave elements to believe this is the case.
> The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily
> deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page
> that they might have.
> Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew about it.
Indeed, you already guessed the answer yourself: there's nothing
preventing people to link to ci.apache.org right now. And that link
shows up first in search engines for "openoffice daily builds". So if we
put an intermediate page with a proper disclaimer this will actually
help to get the message straight.
> When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the
> following problems:
> 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation
> 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements ...
> 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds.
These can happen, but the whole point is that end users won't get those
builds. Direct links to binaries are impossible since URLs change every
day/week; links to pages on ci.apache.org without explanations will not
result in downloads but in puzzled users (we show a mix of everything
from SDK to console logs...). Let me add, Infra will let us know very
quickly if end users start downloading daily builds.
> Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org
> address on the dev and qa lists?
That is the key question. Here are some more explanations.
What I propose: add a link "Development builds" to the column on the
right hand side of http://www.openoffice.org/download/ ; the link leads
to http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html (a page Dave
objected to; I've put a large DRAFT disclaimer on top, and I hope we can
keep the page online during this discussion for convenience); this page
gives all necessary disclaimers, ways to get involved and links to the
dev builds.
Why would it be helpful?
1) Because links shared by e-mail simply have not worked well so far.
Localization volunteers, for example, are confused on how/when/where dev
builds are made available, if they are available for their platform and
in their language and so on. If they know that there is a path from the
download page their life will be easier and our product more tested.
2) Because it allows to enlarge our community. Power users periodically
scan our download pages looking for "something new", especially in this
period. They are likely unaware of our daily builds. But if we manage to
make them aware both that daily builds exist and that they exist as part
of a community QA effort we might get a few new good QA volunteers for
version 4.1.0. If you notice, the proposed intermediate page also gives
information on how to join QA. By the way, this would also help with
perception: even those who will never try those builds can see that
there are constant improvements, happening in an open environment.
> Other solutions:
> 1) ... If the goal is to have only project members
> download, then put it on a page that only project members read
Kay's improvements to
http://openoffice.staging.apache.org/developer-faqs.html#where_can_i_download_developer_builds
(to fix: both Raphael's and Ariel's builds are very outdated at the
moment so they shouldn't be mentioned) are complementary to what I propose.
> 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download
> page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account.
This is an unnecessary effort; contributing should be easy.
> 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage
> long-term use.
I like this. Well, not a literal date-based expiration since it has an
old-fashioned "Trial version expired" effect. But pointing the update
information to a page where we explain to the user that he is running a
dev build meant only for testing could help.
Of course, if we keep the discussion open until April it will become
useless to my intended purpose. But I would see it as a missed
opportunity to enlarge the community. And this project, like all
projects, should never waste opportunities.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>>
>>> Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy.
>>>
>>> It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far.
>
>
> I'm moving this to an own thread as per Juergen's request (but this IS
> release-relevant: I'd like to have more visibility for dev builds in the
> weeks leading to 4.1). And I'm leave the snippet above just to say that
> "Policy forbids this" is not a killer argument in this case. If the Apache
> policy gets in the way, we are probably applying it too conservatively, and
> I heave elements to believe this is the case.
>
>> The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily
>> deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page
>> that they might have.
>> Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew about
>> it.
>
>
> Indeed, you already guessed the answer yourself: there's nothing preventing
> people to link to ci.apache.org right now. And that link shows up first in
> search engines for "openoffice daily builds". So if we put an intermediate
> page with a proper disclaimer this will actually help to get the message
> straight.
>
>> When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the
>> following problems:
>> 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation
>> 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements ...
>> 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds.
>
>
> These can happen, but the whole point is that end users won't get those
> builds. Direct links to binaries are impossible since URLs change every
> day/week; links to pages on ci.apache.org without explanations will not
> result in downloads but in puzzled users (we show a mix of everything from
> SDK to console logs...). Let me add, Infra will let us know very quickly if
> end users start downloading daily builds.
>
This is good to know. I had not noticed that the URLs for the
binaries encoded the revision number, so the danger of deep links to
them is diminished.
>> Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org
>> address on the dev and qa lists?
>
>
> That is the key question. Here are some more explanations.
>
> What I propose: add a link "Development builds" to the column on the right
> hand side of http://www.openoffice.org/download/ ; the link leads to
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html (a page Dave objected to;
> I've put a large DRAFT disclaimer on top, and I hope we can keep the page
> online during this discussion for convenience); this page gives all
> necessary disclaimers, ways to get involved and links to the dev builds.
>
> Why would it be helpful?
>
> 1) Because links shared by e-mail simply have not worked well so far.
> Localization volunteers, for example, are confused on how/when/where dev
> builds are made available, if they are available for their platform and in
> their language and so on. If they know that there is a path from the
> download page their life will be easier and our product more tested.
>
We do have links in other pages, pages intended specifically for
project volunteers, e.g.:
http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/intro-qa.html. So I have
nothing against this info being shared with volunteers. It should be
shared with them. My concern was putting the info on our main
download page which is a public-facing page designed for end users.
This page is 2nd only to our index.html home page. It is a very
prominent place to put something like this.
But I'll say this: If it is abused, we'll know about it quickly and
can change the page and links. So the risk of giving this a try is
low.
> 2) Because it allows to enlarge our community. Power users periodically scan
> our download pages looking for "something new", especially in this period.
> They are likely unaware of our daily builds. But if we manage to make them
> aware both that daily builds exist and that they exist as part of a
> community QA effort we might get a few new good QA volunteers for version
> 4.1.0. If you notice, the proposed intermediate page also gives information
> on how to join QA. By the way, this would also help with perception: even
> those who will never try those builds can see that there are constant
> improvements, happening in an open environment.
>
>> Other solutions:
>> 1) ... If the goal is to have only project members
>> download, then put it on a page that only project members read
>
>
> Kay's improvements to
> http://openoffice.staging.apache.org/developer-faqs.html#where_can_i_download_developer_builds
> (to fix: both Raphael's and Ariel's builds are very outdated at the moment
> so they shouldn't be mentioned) are complementary to what I propose.
>
>> 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download
>> page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account.
>
>
> This is an unnecessary effort; contributing should be easy.
>
>> 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage
>> long-term use.
>
>
> I like this. Well, not a literal date-based expiration since it has an
> old-fashioned "Trial version expired" effect. But pointing the update
> information to a page where we explain to the user that he is running a dev
> build meant only for testing could help.
>
Also, maybe have the developer builds have a different splash screen
and logo, like we do with the beta, so it clear what the status is.
> Of course, if we keep the discussion open until April it will become useless
> to my intended purpose. But I would see it as a missed opportunity to
> enlarge the community. And this project, like all projects, should never
> waste opportunities.
>
We'd enhance this if we had a "report bug" link on the help menu,
maybe also a link to our "get involved" page in the Help/About page.
Regards,
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>
>>> Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy.
>>>>
>>> It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far.
>>>
>>
> I'm moving this to an own thread as per Juergen's request (but this IS
> release-relevant: I'd like to have more visibility for dev builds in the
> weeks leading to 4.1). And I'm leave the snippet above just to say that
> "Policy forbids this" is not a killer argument in this case. If the Apache
> policy gets in the way, we are probably applying it too conservatively, and
> I heave elements to believe this is the case.
>
> The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily
>> deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page
>> that they might have.
>> Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew
>> about it.
>>
>
> Indeed, you already guessed the answer yourself: there's nothing
> preventing people to link to ci.apache.org right now. And that link shows
> up first in search engines for "openoffice daily builds". So if we put an
> intermediate page with a proper disclaimer this will actually help to get
> the message straight.
>
Can we add descriptions/additional explanation directly to our main
http://ci.apache.org page?
>
> When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the
>> following problems:
>> 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation
>> 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements ...
>> 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds.
>>
>
> These can happen, but the whole point is that end users won't get those
> builds. Direct links to binaries are impossible since URLs change every
> day/week; links to pages on ci.apache.org without explanations will not
> result in downloads but in puzzled users (we show a mix of everything from
> SDK to console logs...). Let me add, Infra will let us know very quickly if
> end users start downloading daily builds.
>
> Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org
>> address on the dev and qa lists?
>>
>
> That is the key question. Here are some more explanations.
>
> What I propose: add a link "Development builds" to the column on the right
> hand side of http://www.openoffice.org/download/ ; the link leads to
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html (a page Dave objected
> to; I've put a large DRAFT disclaimer on top, and I hope we can keep the
> page online during this discussion for convenience); this page gives all
> necessary disclaimers, ways to get involved and links to the dev builds.
>
> Why would it be helpful?
>
> 1) Because links shared by e-mail simply have not worked well so far.
> Localization volunteers, for example, are confused on how/when/where dev
> builds are made available, if they are available for their platform and in
> their language and so on. If they know that there is a path from the
> download page their life will be easier and our product more tested.
>
> 2) Because it allows to enlarge our community. Power users periodically
> scan our download pages looking for "something new", especially in this
> period. They are likely unaware of our daily builds. But if we manage to
> make them aware both that daily builds exist and that they exist as part of
> a community QA effort we might get a few new good QA volunteers for version
> 4.1.0. If you notice, the proposed intermediate page also gives information
> on how to join QA. By the way, this would also help with perception: even
> those who will never try those builds can see that there are constant
> improvements, happening in an open environment.
>
> Other solutions:
>> 1) ... If the goal is to have only project members
>> download, then put it on a page that only project members read
>>
>
> Kay's improvements to http://openoffice.staging.apache.org/developer-faqs.
> html#where_can_i_download_developer_builds (to fix: both Raphael's and
> Ariel's builds are very outdated at the moment so they shouldn't be
> mentioned) are complementary to what I propose.
>
> 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download
>> page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account.
>>
>
> This is an unnecessary effort; contributing should be easy.
>
> 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage
>> long-term use.
>>
>
> I like this. Well, not a literal date-based expiration since it has an
> old-fashioned "Trial version expired" effect. But pointing the update
> information to a page where we explain to the user that he is running a dev
> build meant only for testing could help.
>
> Of course, if we keep the discussion open until April it will become
> useless to my intended purpose. But I would see it as a missed opportunity
> to enlarge the community. And this project, like all projects, should never
> waste opportunities.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
-- James Mason
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com>.
Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Tal Daniel wrote:
>
>> Excuse me for intervening the discussion, but I still don't get the
>> difference between these links:
>> [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_beta.html
>> [2] http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
>> [3] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/
>> Development+Snapshot+Builds
>>
>> I'm lost, and others may feel the same.
>>
>
> ... Head to the download page http://www.openoffice.org/download/ (Right
> column, Additional Resources, Development builds) to get the builds between
> 4.1.0-beta and the coming 4.1.0 final. These are probably the ones you are
> interested in. Hebrew will be available after the next run (tomorrow). This
> corresponds to item #2 in your list above.
>
> Item #1 is the beta release, 4.1.0-beta. It is the one we want the general
> public to test. But volunteers who have already tested the beta and need to
> check specific bugs or features addressed after the beta will probably want
> to use #2.
>
> So we have: [Beta = #1] --> [Snapshots from AOO410 = download page or #2]
> --> 4.1.0
>
> Item #3 contains snapshots that are built from time to time. They can be
> built from the trunk or from a release branch (not every bugfix or feature
> we add now will go into 4.1.0: most of them will be used for the version
> after 4.1.0, so they go to "trunk" instead of going to the "AOO410
> branch"). They currently contain a snapshot that was taken for the Beta, so
> they are not useful at the moment. When we are not near a release, they are
> built from trunk and are a good way to test the latest changes.
*Thanks*, Andrea, for the explanation. It cleared things up.
I always feel so uncomfortable to mail the list with only a "thanks";
mailing lists should have a LIKE button too :)
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Tal Daniel wrote:
> Excuse me for intervening the discussion, but I still don't get the
> difference between these links:
> [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_beta.html
> [2] http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> [3] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds
> I'm lost, and others may feel the same.
Making your life simpler is what this discussion is meant to do... so no
problem!
Head to the download page http://www.openoffice.org/download/ (Right
column, Additional Resources, Development builds) to get the builds
between 4.1.0-beta and the coming 4.1.0 final. These are probably the
ones you are interested in. Hebrew will be available after the next run
(tomorrow). This corresponds to item #2 in your list above.
Item #1 is the beta release, 4.1.0-beta. It is the one we want the
general public to test. But volunteers who have already tested the beta
and need to check specific bugs or features addressed after the beta
will probably want to use #2.
So we have:
[Beta = #1] --> [Snapshots from AOO410 = download page or #2] --> 4.1.0
Item #3 contains snapshots that are built from time to time. They can be
built from the trunk or from a release branch (not every bugfix or
feature we add now will go into 4.1.0: most of them will be used for the
version after 4.1.0, so they go to "trunk" instead of going to the
"AOO410 branch"). They currently contain a snapshot that was taken for
the Beta, so they are not useful at the moment. When we are not near a
release, they are built from trunk and are a good way to test the latest
changes.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Tal Daniel <ta...@gmail.com>.
Excuse me for intervening the discussion, but I still don't get the
difference between these links:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/all_beta.html
http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds
I'm lost, and others may feel the same.
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 26/03/2014 Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 03/26/2014 12:41 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> Good! So I'll proceed in about 24 hours to:
>> - Adding a link (right column) from http://www.openoffice.org/download/
>> to http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
>> - Removing the "Do not link" notice from
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
>> - Making sure we only list the builds that are from the AOO410 branch,
>> i.e., between beta and 4.1 final.
> Do we have agreement of the fial location of the hints ...
> I believe it's better located in the later website as we have already a
> developer section.
I've now published the changes. I kept the URLs as above, but I believe
we can rediscuss the URL of the intermediate page before the next (after
4.1, probably pre-4.1.1 or whatever will come) "heavy QA" period a few
months from now.
By the way, I'm not really happy with having two official sites, two
official wikis... not to mention the outdated content. The more we
consolidate, the better.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 03/26/2014 12:41 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> On 23/03/2014 Dave Fisher wrote:
>> +1 to proceeding along the careful plan that has been developed.
>
> Good! So I'll proceed in about 24 hours to:
> - Adding a link (right column) from http://www.openoffice.org/download/
> to http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> - Removing the "Do not link" notice from
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> - Making sure we only list the builds that are from the AOO410 branch,
> i.e., between beta and 4.1 final.
Do we have agreement of the fial location of the hints
(www.openoffice.org or openoffice.apache.org)
I believe it's better located in the later website as we have already a
developer section.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 23/03/2014 Dave Fisher wrote:
> +1 to proceeding along the careful plan that has been developed.
Good! So I'll proceed in about 24 hours to:
- Adding a link (right column) from http://www.openoffice.org/download/
to http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
- Removing the "Do not link" notice from
http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
- Making sure we only list the builds that are from the AOO410 branch,
i.e., between beta and 4.1 final.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi -
Andrea shared with me the conversations that he had regarding the policy and I am convinced that he did in fact have the conversations that I suggested he should have.
+1 to proceeding along the careful plan that has been developed.
Regards,
Dave
On Mar 20, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I am only commenting on a Foundation policy regarding advertising builds. Infrastructure is shared and while the impact of 1000s of users downloading a nightly build may seem small it has a possible negative influence on the 150 other projects and 50 podlings that share this infrastructure.
>
> If you want guidance or clearance on an exception to the policy then I think you know where to go. Infrastructure will need to agree and the board must not object.
>
> Best Regards,
> Dave
>
> On Mar 19, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>> This means, normal users go to:
>>> www.openoffice.org/download/
>>> Power users, dev's, qa's, etc. should be pointed to:
>>> openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>>> So, putting text from Andrea's webpage proposal into the webpage Kay has
>>> found (again ;-) ) could be the golden way.
>>
>> They are two improvements in two different directions. Both good (as it would be good to add text to the ci.apache.org page; some of us, but not me, do have access to it).
>>
>> I see no reasons against doing both (pending resolution of the -1 by Dave; but I hope this can be withdrawn after the new explanations).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Andrea,
I am only commenting on a Foundation policy regarding advertising builds. Infrastructure is shared and while the impact of 1000s of users downloading a nightly build may seem small it has a possible negative influence on the 150 other projects and 50 podlings that share this infrastructure.
If you want guidance or clearance on an exception to the policy then I think you know where to go. Infrastructure will need to agree and the board must not object.
Best Regards,
Dave
On Mar 19, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> This means, normal users go to:
>> www.openoffice.org/download/
>> Power users, dev's, qa's, etc. should be pointed to:
>> openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>> So, putting text from Andrea's webpage proposal into the webpage Kay has
>> found (again ;-) ) could be the golden way.
>
> They are two improvements in two different directions. Both good (as it would be good to add text to the ci.apache.org page; some of us, but not me, do have access to it).
>
> I see no reasons against doing both (pending resolution of the -1 by Dave; but I hope this can be withdrawn after the new explanations).
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 3/20/14 3:13 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> >> Development continues on trunk and completely new unrelated problems can
> >> come up here.
> >
> > I don't want to divert the discussion, but wouldn't it make sense to
> > have daily builds both for AOO410 and for trunk? Sure, this means more
> > effort and more resources, but even if a daily build only fixes those
> > couple bugs that may have been approved as stoppers the day before, it's
> > already quite useful to volunteers who don't build OpenOffice themselves.
>
> sure that would make sense
>
> >
> >> For the release only the aoo410 branch is relevant. Well I have moved
> >> yesterday the SNAPSHOT tag on a proper version of the aoo410 branch and
> >> the next snapshot build comes closer to what we want release. But the
> >> SNAPSHOT build from the bots is Windows only.
> >
> > OK, so we are starting to have Windows (and Linux, right?) builds that
> > are intermediate steps between 4.1.0-Beta and 4.1.0. These do not
> > require extra effort, and these are the ones that should be very visible
> > to our volunteers and prospective volunteers if we want to get the
> > maximum QA coverage.
>
> no Linux from the bots, we have only a windows bot building the SNAPSHOT
> as far as I know
>
> Juergen
>
We have a 32 bit Linux SNAPSHOT, and a windows 7 SNAPSHOT which builds once
a week on Sunday at 7:00A (not sure about timezone).
The 4.10 tag is also building once a week on Sunday.
>
> >
> >> I hope you see my point and we should first work on the basics.
> >
> > I can edit the page to keep only builds that are from the AOO410 branch.
> > Remember, I see this as a targeted effort to deliver great quality in
> > 4.1.0. So I would make the page visible again when a new release is
> > approaching, to show what we will have available at that time.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
-- James Mason
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/20/14 3:13 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
>> Development continues on trunk and completely new unrelated problems can
>> come up here.
>
> I don't want to divert the discussion, but wouldn't it make sense to
> have daily builds both for AOO410 and for trunk? Sure, this means more
> effort and more resources, but even if a daily build only fixes those
> couple bugs that may have been approved as stoppers the day before, it's
> already quite useful to volunteers who don't build OpenOffice themselves.
sure that would make sense
>
>> For the release only the aoo410 branch is relevant. Well I have moved
>> yesterday the SNAPSHOT tag on a proper version of the aoo410 branch and
>> the next snapshot build comes closer to what we want release. But the
>> SNAPSHOT build from the bots is Windows only.
>
> OK, so we are starting to have Windows (and Linux, right?) builds that
> are intermediate steps between 4.1.0-Beta and 4.1.0. These do not
> require extra effort, and these are the ones that should be very visible
> to our volunteers and prospective volunteers if we want to get the
> maximum QA coverage.
no Linux from the bots, we have only a windows bot building the SNAPSHOT
as far as I know
Juergen
>
>> I hope you see my point and we should first work on the basics.
>
> I can edit the page to keep only builds that are from the AOO410 branch.
> Remember, I see this as a targeted effort to deliver great quality in
> 4.1.0. So I would make the page visible again when a new release is
> approaching, to show what we will have available at that time.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> Development continues on trunk and completely new unrelated problems can
> come up here.
I don't want to divert the discussion, but wouldn't it make sense to
have daily builds both for AOO410 and for trunk? Sure, this means more
effort and more resources, but even if a daily build only fixes those
couple bugs that may have been approved as stoppers the day before, it's
already quite useful to volunteers who don't build OpenOffice themselves.
> For the release only the aoo410 branch is relevant. Well I have moved
> yesterday the SNAPSHOT tag on a proper version of the aoo410 branch and
> the next snapshot build comes closer to what we want release. But the
> SNAPSHOT build from the bots is Windows only.
OK, so we are starting to have Windows (and Linux, right?) builds that
are intermediate steps between 4.1.0-Beta and 4.1.0. These do not
require extra effort, and these are the ones that should be very visible
to our volunteers and prospective volunteers if we want to get the
maximum QA coverage.
> I hope you see my point and we should first work on the basics.
I can edit the page to keep only builds that are from the AOO410 branch.
Remember, I see this as a targeted effort to deliver great quality in
4.1.0. So I would make the page visible again when a new release is
approaching, to show what we will have available at that time.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/20/14 8:59 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> which builds exactly do you want to promote here and with what
>> explanation?
>> - build bots are fine, need no or only little explanation
>> - manually built snapshot/milestones
>> -- please no further page where entries have to be edited manually as
>> well
>
> Whatever is useful to our community. Anyway, the draft is online at
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
> and I think it's rather clear if one reads all of it.
I have read it and I see not how it can help for the release. Feedback
on nightly builds from trunk does not help us really at the moment.
Development continues on trunk and completely new unrelated problems can
come up here.
For the release only the aoo410 branch is relevant. Well I have moved
yesterday the SNAPSHOT tag on a proper version of the aoo410 branch and
the next snapshot build comes closer to what we want release. But the
SNAPSHOT build from the bots is Windows only.
I hope you see my point and we should first work on the basics.
Juergen
>
>> Again somebody should continue to work on build bots that are identical
>> with the build release machines that we can use this builds directly.
>
> This is a unrelated problem, and does not apply to this release, even
> though I hope we can make some steps forward here too and indeed align
> the buildbots with the release baseline for a future release.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> which builds exactly do you want to promote here and with what explanation?
> - build bots are fine, need no or only little explanation
> - manually built snapshot/milestones
> -- please no further page where entries have to be edited manually as well
Whatever is useful to our community. Anyway, the draft is online at
http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html
and I think it's rather clear if one reads all of it.
> Again somebody should continue to work on build bots that are identical
> with the build release machines that we can use this builds directly.
This is a unrelated problem, and does not apply to this release, even
though I hope we can make some steps forward here too and indeed align
the buildbots with the release baseline for a future release.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/20/14 1:22 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> This means, normal users go to:
>> www.openoffice.org/download/
>> Power users, dev's, qa's, etc. should be pointed to:
>> openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>> So, putting text from Andrea's webpage proposal into the webpage Kay has
>> found (again ;-) ) could be the golden way.
>
> They are two improvements in two different directions. Both good (as it
> would be good to add text to the ci.apache.org page; some of us, but not
> me, do have access to it).
>
> I see no reasons against doing both (pending resolution of the -1 by
> Dave; but I hope this can be withdrawn after the new explanations).
which builds exactly do you want to promote here and with what explanation?
- build bots are fine, need no or only little explanation
- manually built snapshot/milestones
-- please no further page where entries have to be edited manually as well
Again somebody should continue to work on build bots that are identical
with the build release machines that we can use this builds directly.
Different configuration switches can trigger release, beta or dev builds
Juergen
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> This means, normal users go to:
> www.openoffice.org/download/
> Power users, dev's, qa's, etc. should be pointed to:
> openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
> So, putting text from Andrea's webpage proposal into the webpage Kay has
> found (again ;-) ) could be the golden way.
They are two improvements in two different directions. Both good (as it
would be good to add text to the ci.apache.org page; some of us, but not
me, do have access to it).
I see no reasons against doing both (pending resolution of the -1 by
Dave; but I hope this can be withdrawn after the new explanations).
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Better visibility for dev builds (Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads
and feedback and a proposed way to the final)
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 03/19/2014 12:21 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy.
>>> It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far.
>
> I'm moving this to an own thread as per Juergen's request (but this IS
> release-relevant: I'd like to have more visibility for dev builds in the
> weeks leading to 4.1). And I'm leave the snippet above just to say that
> "Policy forbids this" is not a killer argument in this case. If the
> Apache policy gets in the way, we are probably applying it too
> conservatively, and I heave elements to believe this is the case.
>
>> The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily
>> deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page
>> that they might have.
>> Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew
>> about it.
>
> Indeed, you already guessed the answer yourself: there's nothing
> preventing people to link to ci.apache.org right now. And that link
> shows up first in search engines for "openoffice daily builds". So if we
> put an intermediate page with a proper disclaimer this will actually
> help to get the message straight.
>
>> When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the
>> following problems:
>> 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation
>> 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements ...
>> 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds.
>
> These can happen, but the whole point is that end users won't get those
> builds. Direct links to binaries are impossible since URLs change every
> day/week; links to pages on ci.apache.org without explanations will not
> result in downloads but in puzzled users (we show a mix of everything
> from SDK to console logs...). Let me add, Infra will let us know very
> quickly if end users start downloading daily builds.
>
>> Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org
>> address on the dev and qa lists?
>
> That is the key question. Here are some more explanations.
>
> What I propose: add a link "Development builds" to the column on the
> right hand side of http://www.openoffice.org/download/ ; the link leads
> to http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html (a page Dave
> objected to; I've put a large DRAFT disclaimer on top, and I hope we can
> keep the page online during this discussion for convenience); this page
> gives all necessary disclaimers, ways to get involved and links to the
> dev builds.
>
> Why would it be helpful?
>
> 1) Because links shared by e-mail simply have not worked well so far.
> Localization volunteers, for example, are confused on how/when/where dev
> builds are made available, if they are available for their platform and
> in their language and so on. If they know that there is a path from the
> download page their life will be easier and our product more tested.
>
> 2) Because it allows to enlarge our community. Power users periodically
> scan our download pages looking for "something new", especially in this
> period. They are likely unaware of our daily builds. But if we manage to
> make them aware both that daily builds exist and that they exist as part
> of a community QA effort we might get a few new good QA volunteers for
> version 4.1.0. If you notice, the proposed intermediate page also gives
> information on how to join QA. By the way, this would also help with
> perception: even those who will never try those builds can see that
> there are constant improvements, happening in an open environment.
>
>> Other solutions:
>> 1) ... If the goal is to have only project members
>> download, then put it on a page that only project members read
>
> Kay's improvements to
> http://openoffice.staging.apache.org/developer-faqs.html#where_can_i_download_developer_builds
> (to fix: both Raphael's and Ariel's builds are very outdated at the
> moment so they shouldn't be mentioned) are complementary to what I propose.
I think the policy problem is not real problem and that a central
webpage can have advantages should be also clear. *For me* only the
location of this page is now open.
Of course it's most comfortable to have all things about download in a
single place. However, in this case I think a split regarding our target
audience is better.
This means, normal users go to:
www.openoffice.org/download/
Power users, dev's, qa's, etc. should be pointed to:
openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
So, putting text from Andrea's webpage proposal into the webpage Kay has
found (again ;-) ) could be the golden way.
My 2 ct
Marcus
>> 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download
>> page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account.
>
> This is an unnecessary effort; contributing should be easy.
>
>> 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage
>> long-term use.
>
> I like this. Well, not a literal date-based expiration since it has an
> old-fashioned "Trial version expired" effect. But pointing the update
> information to a page where we explain to the user that he is running a
> dev build meant only for testing could help.
>
> Of course, if we keep the discussion open until April it will become
> useless to my intended purpose. But I would see it as a missed
> opportunity to enlarge the community. And this project, like all
> projects, should never waste opportunities.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org