You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> on 2018/03/01 06:38:01 UTC
Status on 4.2.0?
Hello all,
What is the current status on 4.2.0?
I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
All the best
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Pedro,
Am 03.03.2018 um 16:55 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>> Technically seen:
>> To unpack the installation files and to start the installation with MSI.
>>
>> Historically seen:
>> I don't know! ;-)
>>
>
> The nsis installer extracts and runs the MSVC runtime libraries installer before running the AOO installer. Since AOO is compiled with MSVC it requires these libraries are installed first.
No, NSIS just unpacks the files and calls setup.exe.
The MSI installer then installs MSVC runtime first before proceeding. ;-)
Regards, Matthias
> I don't know how TDF got rid of that step but possibly they are including the MSVC libraries needed in the program folder?
>
>
> Maybe AOO can do the same and skip the nsis installer?
>
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
I think it is better to renew the installer completely. I have found a open source framework that simplifies the creation of the installer and builds the msi file for us.
It offers .net framework for writing a installer screens (MSI does not provide such a thing). The tutorials I have read looked pretty streight forward, at least for the standard installer stuff.
I think I read that you can include a dependance msi package in the msi package.
But I forgot again. I looked into msi a month ago. The last month has been quite intense for me.
We could deliver a single MSI file in future and even create the patch file from it.
I am currently unsure concerning the package signing, but once we have a pure MSI setup it should be easy to add too, right?
Am 3. März 2018 16:55:32 MEZ schrieb Pedro Lino <pe...@mailbox.org>:
>
>> Technically seen:
>> To unpack the installation files and to start the installation
>with MSI.
>>
>> Historically seen:
>> I don't know! ;-)
>>
>
>
>The nsis installer extracts and runs the MSVC runtime libraries
>installer before running the AOO installer. Since AOO is compiled with
>MSVC it requires these libraries are installed first. I don't know how
>TDF got rid of that step but possibly they are including the MSVC
>libraries needed in the program folder?
>
>
>Maybe AOO can do the same and skip the nsis installer?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Pedro Lino <pe...@mailbox.org>.
> Technically seen:
> To unpack the installation files and to start the installation with MSI.
>
> Historically seen:
> I don't know! ;-)
>
The nsis installer extracts and runs the MSVC runtime libraries installer before running the AOO installer. Since AOO is compiled with MSVC it requires these libraries are installed first. I don't know how TDF got rid of that step but possibly they are including the MSVC libraries needed in the program folder?
Maybe AOO can do the same and skip the nsis installer?
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 03.03.2018 um 13:41 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Why do we need nsis again?
Technically seen:
To unpack the installation files and to start the installation with MSI.
Historically seen:
I don't know! ;-)
But I suspect you are thinking of:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126703
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Am 3. März 2018 12:39:32 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Am 01.03.2018 um 07:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
>>> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
>> You probably think of:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127315
>>
>> I would like to have this one solved: ;-)
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628
>>
>> Although it is not a critical one it is a regression on Windows since
>> 4.1.3 and it confuses new users.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>> All the best
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
Why do we need nsis again?
Am 3. März 2018 12:39:32 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>Hi Peter,
>
>Am 01.03.2018 um 07:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
>> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
>
>You probably think of:
>https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127315
>
>I would like to have this one solved: ;-)
>https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628
>
>Although it is not a critical one it is a regression on Windows since
>4.1.3 and it confuses new users.
>
>Regards,
> Matthias
>
>>
>> All the best
>> Peter
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 01.03.2018 um 07:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> Hello all,
>
> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
You probably think of:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127315
I would like to have this one solved: ;-)
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628
Although it is not a critical one it is a regression on Windows since
4.1.3 and it confuses new users.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> All the best
> Peter
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 09.03.2018 um 00:16 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> On 08/03/2018 Marcus wrote:
>> However, for me "Beta" sounds like from the 1990s. Maybe we can find
>> another term and try to be a bit more modern with "Preview Release",
>> "Early Access" or something else.
>
> I'm not much interested in how outdated the name "Beta" looks, but it
> looks wrong. Technically, this would be more an Alpha than a Beta as
> features are still unstable and actively developed. For example,
> translations have not landed yet and they would be expected to be in a
> Beta.
when I think of signing it is indeed far away from feature complete. So,
it indeed won't be in the phase of a beta but 1-2 stage before.
>
>> Here at Apache I don't remember that we had done a beta release.
>
> We made a beta release for 4.1:
> https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/seeking_beta_testers_for_apache
Ah, OK
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 08/03/2018 Marcus wrote:
> However, for me "Beta" sounds like from the 1990s. Maybe we can find
> another term and try to be a bit more modern with "Preview Release",
> "Early Access" or something else.
I'm not much interested in how outdated the name "Beta" looks, but it
looks wrong. Technically, this would be more an Alpha than a Beta as
features are still unstable and actively developed. For example,
translations have not landed yet and they would be expected to be in a Beta.
> Here at Apache I don't remember that we had done a beta release.
We made a beta release for 4.1:
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/seeking_beta_testers_for_apache
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08.03.2018 um 22:58 schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 22:53:04 +0100
> Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 06.03.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
>>> won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
>>> get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
>>> beta in any case.
>
> Will the gstreamer-1.0 updates be in 4.2.0? It would be good if they were, as Impress at present is nearly not worth having for any presentation other than text screens.
IMHO we haven't seen a call for feature freeze. Therefore it's still
possible to add this.
However, at the end it depends on the release manager what to add in
this phase.
Marcus
>> right.
>>
>> However, for me "Beta" sounds like from the 1990s. Maybe we can find
>> another term and try to be a bit more modern with "Preview Release",
>> "Early Access" or something else.
>>
>> What do you mean?
>>
>> Sorry for not being more helpful at the moment. But this was the first
>> thing I stumbled upon when thinking about a beta release. ;-)
>>
>>> Having never done a Beta for AOO I'm not sure of the process,
>>> but assuming it is similar to RM for the RCs, I'm game to help
>>> push this along.
>>
>> Here at Apache I don't remember that we had done a beta release. So, the
>> last one is much longer ago. I think let's define and do the process
>> like we need it.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>> On Mar 1, 2018, at 1:38 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
>>>> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
>>>>
>>>> All the best
>>>> Pete
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
macOS (Re: Status on 4.2.0? )
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The macOS builds are ready. I'll wait until my Linux-64bit builds are
done, via Ubuntu 14.04, before I upload them. Then I'll start on the
Linux 32 bit ones, also Ubuntu.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Until we figure out what to do about the gstreamer stuff, I'll
focus on the macOS builds. We will need to determine
how we'll handle Linux builds and differentiate between
builds for platforms with glib >= 2.32 (Ubuntu 14.04)
and those older (CentOS 6). This is an issue because
it'll cause changes required w/ upstream distros and
downloads...
Comments and suggestions welcomed!!
> On Mar 14, 2018, at 9:11 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>
> I've gone ahead and make the AOO 4.2 Release Wiki page
> for us to start working on it.
>
> I propose to take HEAD of trunk and create a -dev developers
> build for test and "review" by March 16th. I'll sign up for macOS
> and Linux.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Apache+OpenOffice+4.2
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
I uploaded new builds (r1826903) for Windows:
https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/
If someone wants an additional language added, drop me a line.
Regards,
Matthias
Am 15.03.2018 um 12:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 14.03.2018 um 14:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I've gone ahead and make the AOO 4.2 Release Wiki page
>> for us to start working on it.
>>
>> I propose to take HEAD of trunk and create a -dev developers
>> build for test and "review" by March 16th. I'll sign up for macOS
>> and Linux.
> I can take the Windows part.
>
> By "developers build" you mean a "normal" build only marked as -dev or
> building against target openofficedev (sdkoodev, ooodevlanguagepack)?
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Apache+OpenOffice+4.2
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Jim,
Am 14.03.2018 um 14:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I've gone ahead and make the AOO 4.2 Release Wiki page
> for us to start working on it.
>
> I propose to take HEAD of trunk and create a -dev developers
> build for test and "review" by March 16th. I'll sign up for macOS
> and Linux.
I can take the Windows part.
By "developers build" you mean a "normal" build only marked as -dev or
building against target openofficedev (sdkoodev, ooodevlanguagepack)?
Regards,
Matthias
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Apache+OpenOffice+4.2
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I've gone ahead and make the AOO 4.2 Release Wiki page
for us to start working on it.
I propose to take HEAD of trunk and create a -dev developers
build for test and "review" by March 16th. I'll sign up for macOS
and Linux.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Apache+OpenOffice+4.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>.
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 15:18:58 -0500
Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:58 PM, Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 22:53:04 +0100
> > Marcus <marcus.mail@wtnet.de <ma...@wtnet.de>> wrote:
> >
> >> Am 06.03.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> >>> Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
> >>> won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
> >>> get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
> >>> beta in any case.
> >
> > Will the gstreamer-1.0 updates be in 4.2.0? It would be good if they were, as Impress at present is nearly not worth having for any presentation other than text screens.
> >
>
> Personally, I think they should be. My plan is to kick off some Linux and macOS
> builds early next week. So it would indeed be in our best interest to put those
> updates in. I see no reason to delay. We should strive to not only get
> 4.2.0 out as soon as we can, but also as up-to-date as we can as well.
>
When you have deb 64bit builds available I'll be happy to test some Impress presentations with multimedia.
--
Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:58 PM, Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 22:53:04 +0100
> Marcus <marcus.mail@wtnet.de <ma...@wtnet.de>> wrote:
>
>> Am 06.03.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
>>> won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
>>> get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
>>> beta in any case.
>
> Will the gstreamer-1.0 updates be in 4.2.0? It would be good if they were, as Impress at present is nearly not worth having for any presentation other than text screens.
>
Personally, I think they should be. My plan is to kick off some Linux and macOS
builds early next week. So it would indeed be in our best interest to put those
updates in. I see no reason to delay. We should strive to not only get
4.2.0 out as soon as we can, but also as up-to-date as we can as well.
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>.
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 22:53:04 +0100
Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 06.03.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> > Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
> > won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
> > get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
> > beta in any case.
Will the gstreamer-1.0 updates be in 4.2.0? It would be good if they were, as Impress at present is nearly not worth having for any presentation other than text screens.
Rory
>
> right.
>
> However, for me "Beta" sounds like from the 1990s. Maybe we can find
> another term and try to be a bit more modern with "Preview Release",
> "Early Access" or something else.
>
> What do you mean?
>
> Sorry for not being more helpful at the moment. But this was the first
> thing I stumbled upon when thinking about a beta release. ;-)
>
> > Having never done a Beta for AOO I'm not sure of the process,
> > but assuming it is similar to RM for the RCs, I'm game to help
> > push this along.
>
> Here at Apache I don't remember that we had done a beta release. So, the
> last one is much longer ago. I think let's define and do the process
> like we need it.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> >> On Mar 1, 2018, at 1:38 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
> >> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
> >>
> >> All the best
> >> Pete
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 06.03.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
> won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
> get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
> beta in any case.
right.
However, for me "Beta" sounds like from the 1990s. Maybe we can find
another term and try to be a bit more modern with "Preview Release",
"Early Access" or something else.
What do you mean?
Sorry for not being more helpful at the moment. But this was the first
thing I stumbled upon when thinking about a beta release. ;-)
> Having never done a Beta for AOO I'm not sure of the process,
> but assuming it is similar to RM for the RCs, I'm game to help
> push this along.
Here at Apache I don't remember that we had done a beta release. So, the
last one is much longer ago. I think let's define and do the process
like we need it.
Marcus
>> On Mar 1, 2018, at 1:38 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
>> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
>>
>> All the best
>> Pete
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
beta in any case.
Having never done a Beta for AOO I'm not sure of the process,
but assuming it is similar to RM for the RCs, I'm game to help
push this along.
> On Mar 1, 2018, at 1:38 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> What is the current status on 4.2.0?
> I have seen one bug that fires when opening a document. We got more?
>
> All the best
> Peter
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Status on 4.2.0?
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
On 3/6/2018 12:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Is it time to start thinking of an 'official' beta release for 4.2.0? We
> won't get much traction and feedback on the codebase until we
> get more people using and testing it, which is one goal of a
> beta in any case.
>
> Having never done a Beta for AOO I'm not sure of the process,
> but assuming it is similar to RM for the RCs, I'm game to help
> push this along.
<snip>
I believe that is is well past time to be doing a beta of 4.2. It is
also far past time to be having the conversation of what the next
release will be which includes what we call it who the release manager
will be, etc.
Ideally a public beta should be part of the overall release plan. The
process shouldn't be that much different from what we used for the RC's.
Regards
Keith