I have managed to make time on the next weekend's. So I volunteer for Release Manager. Hope it helps to get this from the table.
Am 25. Juli 2018 23:29:53 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs <pe...@apache.org>: >I do not believe we have a fix for that. so until someone fixes this, I > >do not see a chance. > > >On 25.07.2018 17:18, FR web forum wrote: >> Regression: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127646 >> This release will fix it? >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >>> De: "Jim Jagielski" <j...@jagunet.com> >>> À: "OOo Apache" <dev@openoffice.apache.org> >>> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Juillet 2018 15:48:00 >>> Objet: Re: A 4.1.6 Release >>> >>> No worries. I have my VMs ready to go. >>> >>>> On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:47 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Fyi: To my frustration I failed yesterday to proceed. My next >>>> timeslot is on Wednesday. I hope nothing will interfere. >>>> >>>> Am 21. Juli 2018 08:28:47 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs >>>> <peter.kov...@posteo.de>: >>>>> I hope i have time on Sunday. I wanted to proceed last Sunday but >>>>> failed on this. >>>>> Currently my calendar is kind of full. Next possible opportunity >>>>> is >>>>> conning Wednesday. >>>>> >>>>> I am undecided if the 4.1.6 will be the last release. But after >>>>> 4.1.6 I >>>>> agree 4.2.0 beta should get priority. I can imagine that at least >>>>> one >>>>> maintenance release could be possible while we stabilize 4.2.0. In >>>>> the >>>>> beta phase. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 19. Juli 2018 19:49:46 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel >>>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de>: >>>>>> Back to the topic: >>>>>> >>>>>> If we want to release 4.1.6, we should start the process >>>>>> described >>>>>> here: >>>>>> >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, 4.1.6 should really be the last 4.1.x. (my opinion). >>>>>> We >>>>> have >>>>>> to get 4.2.0 releasable! >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Matthias >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Marcus: >>>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 22:46 schrieb Kay Schenk: >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Marcus <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we >>>>>> decided >>>>>>>>>> that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument >>>>>>>>>> was, >>>>>>>>>> if they >>>>>>>>>> want something they should support us. This is not showing >>>>>> sympathy >>>>>>>>>> for a >>>>>>>>>> small user group that uses very old software for 2 more years >>>>>> until >>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>> have to move to CentOS 7. I personally think that the >>>>>>>>>> gstreamer >>>>>>>>>> Topic can >>>>>>>>>> be solved after we have released a beta version. Damjan and I >>>>> have >>>>>>>>>> pointed >>>>>>>>>> out a lot of possible ways to deal with the issue. Just for >>>>>>>>>> now I >>>>>>>>>> think we >>>>>>>>>> have other problems then gstreamer in 4.2.0. I think it is my >>>>>> fault >>>>>>>>>> that I >>>>>>>>>> put that argument so much in the front line, but that stuck >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>> me. >>>>>>>>>> In the last months we had a drop in activity. And more then >>>>>>>>>> one >>>>>> topic >>>>>>>>>> received not the attention it deserved. I would not conclude >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> anyone >>>>>>>>>> has stopped caring at this point in time. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let us conclude for now: >>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x is still in maintenance. And in my opinion we could >>>>>>>>>> think >>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> maintaining it until 2020 when CentOS6 drops out of >>>>>>>>>> maintenance. >>>>>> Some >>>>>>>>>> support from CentOS6 side would be nice. But we need to >>>>>>>>>> search >>>>>>>>>> someone for >>>>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>>>> I have that on my todo list, but did not manage to follow it >>>>>>>>>> up. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> incl. gstreamer 0.1.0 that is now within the 4.1.x code. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PS: >>>>>>>>> CentOS 6 will be supported until Nov 2020; which means another >>>>> ~2.5 >>>>>>>>> years. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 4.2.0 has I think 3 bugs we know about and that blocks a beta >>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>> Current target for building with gstreamer is CentOS7. >>>>>>>>>> Building >>>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>>> gstreamer could be done on CentOS6. We should keep the code >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> trunc CentOS >>>>>>>>>> 6 compatible where ever we can for now. That will make it >>>>>>>>>> easy to >>>>>>>>>> back port >>>>>>>>>> patches to 4.1.x if we decide to maintain 4.1.x until EOL of >>>>>> CentOS6. >>>>>>>>> In 4.2.0 we can still keep gstreamer 0.1.0 or update to >>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>> newer. >>>>>>>>> To be honest, I don't care *about this special topic*. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And it is only relevant on Linux, right? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IMHO more relevant is the baseline: When we increase the >>>>>>>>> CentOS >>>>>>>>> version we >>>>>>>>> also raise the sysreq for Linux kernel, glibc, etc. This has a >>>>> much >>>>>>>>> bigger >>>>>>>>> impact for our users. >>>>>>>> You are absolutely correct about this, Marcus. Monitoring the >>>>>> 32-bit >>>>>>>> Linux >>>>>>>> downloads might help here. It does seem like AOO could be >>>>>>>> moving >>>>>> away >>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>> 32-bit for Linux and other operating systems. I don't know what >>>>>>>> impact this >>>>>>>> will have overall though. >>>>>>> I don't remember exactly, does the gstreamer 0.1.0 vs. 1.0.0 >>>>>>> discussion is also connected to the Linux 32-bit builds? If so, >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> solution could be indeed to drop the 32-bit builds. From SF.net >>>>> stats >>>>>>> I get the following (2018-01-01 until today). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BTW: >>>>>>> Very likely it's the used OS the download is started from. And >>>>>>> not >>>>>> the >>>>>>> OS where OpenOffice should be installed on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OS % >>>>>>> ----------------------- >>>>>>> Windows 86,1165 >>>>>>> Macintosh 7,8424 >>>>>>> Unknown 4,9012 >>>>>>> Linux 1,0621 >>>>>>> Android 0,0762 >>>>>>> BSD 0,0011 >>>>>>> Solaris 0,0006 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But even then, I'm sure the most downloads from resp. for Linux >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> be for 64-bit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Has anybody more exact numbers - or an idea how to get them? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 03.07.2018 23:50, Matthias Seidel wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> What impact has Ant 1.10.x exactly on older machines? >>>>>>>>>>> It is no problem for me to build the Windows version with >>>>>>>>>>> Ant >>>>>>>>>>> 1.9.12. As >>>>>>>>>>> long as we use Java 8. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But again, I just did a personal build to test AOO 4.1.x >>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>> Java 8. >>>>>>>>>>> Nothing else. >>>>>>>>>>> To be more precise: I was the only one who cared. No >>>>>>>>>>> response >>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>>>> members! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.07.2018 um 23:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was no longer >>>>>>>>>>>> supported >>>>>> plus >>>>>>>>>>>> had some sort of security related issue making it unsuited >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>> AOO... ie, >>>>>>>>>>>> we *needed* to use Ant 1.10 not just that we now *can* use >>>>>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> How about showing some sympathy and understanding for those >>>>>>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>>>>>> may be >>>>>>>>>>>> stuck w/ older machines? After all, let's be real, our >>>>> continued >>>>>>>>>>>> support >>>>>>>>>>>> for "older" systems is the only real thing we have going >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>> us... It's >>>>>>>>>>>> these little things that make significant ripples in our >>>>>>>>>>>> eco-system and we >>>>>>>>>>>> seem to not really care about that anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Matthias Seidel >>>>>>>>>>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <pe...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everbody. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> July. >>>>>> Even >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we >>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some stuff to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get out to the people. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Containing some security fixes, plus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Java 8 Update 172 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.10.x? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we build with Java 8 we >>>>>>>>>>>>> can >>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>> it... ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>>> My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept what can be done >>>>> with >>>>>> AOO >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But of course we can build with 1.9.x if that is wanted? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >>> >>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
