Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Okay I had a look now.
I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
Are these all of them?
- The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to
note the issue number. :(
Thus I am fine with the Blockers so far. Anything that anyone wants
still to add from the dev list?
There are more to come... ;-)
If you are OK with a blocker, just grant it, so we can move forward.
Regards,
Matthias
All the best
Peter
On 9/6/18 5:10 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to
add one patch concerning mailmerge.
And then off we go, I Think.
I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x
series gets maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else
is moving to 4.2.0.
Am 6. September 2018 15:25:19 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski
<j...@jagunet.com>:
Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on
whether it really is one or not ;)
BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
<matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote:
Hi Jim,
Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they
can use, since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for
older platforms (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make
4.1.6 as good and as stable and as useful, with as many patches and
fixes, as feasible for those users.
Definitely!
We already have some release blocker asked for.
How to proceed?
Regards,
Matthias
On Sep 3, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Matthias Seidel
<matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote:
Hi Andrea,
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
Matthias Seidel wrote:
How about this one:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
It fixes a typo in the build process.
This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
maintenance release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it
wouldn't
make sense to include fixes like this one. Still, it is zero-risk
and
(unfortunately) 4.2.0 is taking longer than expected, so I
understand
if we try to backport some fixes to 4.1.6. No objection.
In general, release blockers should be:
- important bugfixes for users
- important build fixes (e.g., don't break with a new compiler)
- important infrastructure fixes (e.g., support newer JRE, or a
newer
Windows release... just an example)
This is why I didn't ask for release blocker. ;-)
It is just "nice to have" and another resolved issue that would
finally
find its way into a release.
There are a lot of them, that do not qualify as "blocker"...
Regards,
Matthias
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
<mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
<mailto: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
