OpenOffice mention in the Media

[Andrew Rist]

http://xkcd.com/1667/

(be sure to mouse over the image to read the alt text)

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [QUESTION] Getting to AOO for Java (AOO4J)?

[Andrew Rist]

Hope this is not off topic, but I think it should be a part of this
conversation.
If w are looking at moving AOO forward, then we should be looking
forward and not just porting to another development platform.
As such, the two most important destinations are a cloud implementation
and collaboration.  I do think java (plus javascript on a browser on the
client) is the best way to move in that direction, and the first step
would be to port AOO (or at least large portions) to java.
Of course, this project would be an order of magnitude harder than just
porting, but it is the way we could move forward, and not just provide
another port of the current product.

A.

On 11/15/2015 12:06 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Damjan,
>
> I am not digging into the details of how one might do a top-down conversion 
> to an AOO4J.  
>
> However, there are bidirectional dependencies that have to be accounted for 
> when Java is on top of native GUI-using and exception-generating code.  In my 
> one adventure into JNI, 
> , I discovered how upward 
> native dependencies matter when the native code presents a modal dialog 
> against the native Window that the Java level creates and uses.  I suspect 
> that is a far more elaborate problem in the case of an AOO4J. (I also never 
> passed up an exception or produced a null result.)
>
> Since the top-down method that is proposed would require working against the 
> Apache OpenOffice source, I would recommend the following
>
>  1. A proof-of-concept be undertaken on a parallel section of the SVN, 
> at .  (It is more than 
> a branch, it seems to me.)
>
>  2. The proof-of-concept should somehow provide adequate functionality to
> demonstrate that all cases of OpenOffice functionality can be 
> accommodated.  There needs to be confidence in such an outcome.
>
>  3. The proof-of-concept must extend all the way to deployment and how
> deployment of released binaries would be undertaken.  This also 
> must address localization and QA in some manner.
>
>  4. The idea is to identify everything that needs to be accounted for
> in making such a conversion, and to expose any show-stoppers as
> early as possible.
>
>  5. Working on the proof-of-concept must not extend the critical path
> for maintenance and release of software on the current AOO 4.x
> line.  This is perhaps the single most-critical requirement.  
>
> The actual determination to pursue farther would be a matter for the Project 
> Management Committee and the AOO developer community to work out as a matter 
> of project governance.  That is not on the table at the moment.  I suggest 
> that the question not be entertained in the absence of a proof-of-concept 
> around which there is confidence that all considerations can be addressed.
>
>  - Dennis
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Damjan Jovanovic [mailto:dam...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2015 00:58
>> To: Apache OO 
>> Subject: Re: [QUESTION] Getting to AOO for Java (AOO4J)?
>>
>> Let's examine porting AOO to Java in more detail.
>>
>> Java can easily call C code with JNA and also easily call even C++ with
>> BridJ (https://github.com/nativelibs4java/BridJ) (with its sister
>> project
>> JNAerator even generating Java code to compile/link yours against by
>> examining C/C++ header files), and Java can easily call any UNO
>> component.
>> C/C++ on the other hand can only call Java with great pain using the
>> Java
>> invocation API, but UNO wraps that for us, so a Java component can be
>> called as easily as any UNO component. So ideally the smallest unit of
>> granularity while converting should be an UNO component, and C++ -> Java
>> call flow should be avoided.
>>
>> The easiest way to avoid C++ -> Java calls is to convert top down,
>> starting
>> with top level modules like main/desktop and working down. But if A uses
>> B,
>> and A is ported to Java and calls B using JNA/BridJ, then when B is also
>> ported to Java, A's calls to B need to be ported from JNA/BridJ to pure
>> Java, so working top down, while easier, means a 2 phase porting process
>> is
>> necessary. Porting modules that are only accessed via UNO, would avoid
>> the
>> 2 phase problem as UNO would be used before and after; main/xmlsecurity
>> which is only accessed via UNO and needs the category B nss library, is
>> on
>> the chopping block :-).
>>
>> The how of porting is maybe the most interesting. For the migration from
>> CppUnit to Google Test I did recently, the only reason I finished such a
>> massive undertaking in the time that I did, is that I quickly developed
>> a
>> tool to parse source code and convert the API. The tens of thousands of
>> calls to CPPUNIT_ASSERT* in our source tree didn't require hundreds of
>> thousands of keystrokes. Most of my time was spent on the stuff that
>> couldn't be automated, like 

Re: [VOTE] Dennis Hamilton as new AOO Chair.

[Andrew Rist]

[X]  +1, Dennis Hamilton as new Chair



On 8/15/2015 11:57 PM, jan i wrote:
 This is a call for a formal vote among the 1 candidate for the AOO Chair
 role.

 Due to the fact that there are only 1 candidate we could use lazy
 consensus, but since
 some persons might be against that, we will use majority vote, as if there
 was multiple candidates.

 Voting rules are as follows:
 - Only PMC votes are binding, but everybody are welcome to vote
 - The nominee with the most +1 (deducted -1) gets elected
 - VOTE runs until Sunday August 23th
 - As outgoing Chair, I will send resolution to Board August 23th.

 Please vote
 [ ]  +1, I want Dennis Hamilton as new Chair
 [ ] +0, I do not care if Dennis Hamilton becomes new Chair
 [ ] -1, I am against Dennis Hamilton becomes new chair
  (out of curtesy, please add another suggestion).

 Have fun voting.
 rgds
 jan i.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Mac buildbot?

[Andrew Rist]

On 4/1/2015 8:34 AM, jan i wrote:
 On 1 April 2015 at 17:08, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote:

 On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 05:08:08PM +0100, jan i wrote:
 hi

 when I look at http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
 I cannot see the Mac buildbots we got last year, can someone tell me what
 hte status is?

 I need this info for our upcomming board report where I try to make a
 project status as new chair.
 According to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4902 Mac mini
 setup at OSU colo, creds handed off to Andrew Rist, this may translate
 as: the Mac mini is in some University and the credentials are in the
 hands of arist.

 I'd like to have access to that machine, do you know who/where should
 ask for it?

 Arist, I know he has access. But I assume infra could also provide you with
 access.

 Arist is no longer active on IRC, but normally responsive to emails.
hey - I'm on IRC, just not hipchat...
but, true, I have not had time to interact with infra lately.

Ariel,
It would be great if you could take this over - if there is anything I
can do to help, ask.
note - the access I was given was to shell login to the mac mini, you
may need GUI access to do things effectively.
What we had hoped to do is to set up VMs to run the build, versus a
single set of tool versions on the mini.
(of course, if you take this over, you would be in a position to decide
what makes the most sense)

A.


 If you contact infrastructure@a.o or update Infra-4902, mention that we
 have agreed on it.

 If you run into trouble let me know, and I will try to make it happen.


 rgds
 jan I.


 Regards
 --
 Ariel Constenla-Haile
 La Plata, Argentina


-- 

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

[Andrew Rist]

[ + ] Jan Iversen (jani)
(binding)


On 1/30/2015 10:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to
 resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a
 successor could be elected. A previous vote was cancelled. For this
 second vote we have two candidates: Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) and
 Jan Iversen (jani).

 In my capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, I will submit a
 resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by the most voted of the
 two candidates. Since candidates are not on the OpenOffice PMC, the
 winning candidate will automatically be elected to the OpenOffice PMC
 too (assuming we have the needed participation and consensus). I am
 not available to stay in my role.

 Who of the two candidates do you prefer to replace Andrea Pescetti as
 the OpenOffice project PMC Chair?
 [ ] Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid)
 [ ] Jan Iversen (jani)

 Vote opens now and it will last one week, until 6 February 2015 7:00
 PM GMT, to give all community members the opportunity to participate.
 The resolution will be submitted to the Board in time for the February
 meeting (18 February 2015).

 Regards,
   Andrea.

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-- 

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

[Andrew Rist]

[x]  0 Abstain



On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 01:00:34AM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign
 from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could
 be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have
 one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis
 Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote.

 Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair,
 Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by
 Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair?
 [ ] +1 Yes
 [ ]  0 Abstain
 [ ] -1 No

-- 

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ outdated?

[Andrew Rist]

On 10/31/2014 5:36 AM, Regina Henschel wrote:
 Hi Oliver,

 Oliver Brinzing schrieb:

 http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/:

 Windows Nightly
 (aoo-win7) logs install packages Oct 18 02:30
 1631975 success #187 Build successful

 but last build is:
 http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/win/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Win_x86_install_de_1634362.exe



 There seems to be a problem. The build from today is available in
 http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/win/ and the log is
 available in http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/builds/199. But
 I've got no notification email. The last one I've got is for
 http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/builds/187
Looks to me that the html for http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
in no longer being generated - It seems to have been last generated on
Oct 18.  That page is generated by the buildbot infrastructure - we will
need to look into why it is no longer being generated. 

 Kind regards
 Regina



 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-- 

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: release manager for the next release

[Andrew Rist]

On 10/4/2014 1:57 AM, jan i wrote:
 Thanks jürgen for the work you have done.

 making a mac bot a priority seems to be easier said than done. We have had
 a ticket open with infra for more than 2 years, and despite many pokes from
 arist and myself, there are still no date when we can have one
An update on this.  (drum roll please...)  We have received the mac
buildbot!
There are various people to thank for finally getting this done, David
Nalley (vp infra) figured out how to move it forward.
At this point, I've had it for a week, but been OOTO due to some
conference. 
I expect to have it build up and ready to go in short order.

A.

 We have the same problem with a number of our other platforms, and infra
 does not seems very busy with other issues than to care about our
 specialities.

 In other words, I strongly believe we have to depend on non-apache hardware
 to produce a major part of the binaries. A new release manager should
 provide or have access to several VMs in order to cut the release. It has
 always looked as if Jürgen had direct or indirect access to all the
 platforms needed.

 A release manager does not need to be PMC, but only the PMC have binding
 votes for a release..this can theoritically lead to a situation where
 the vote ends with only +1, but the release manager gives a non-binding -1.
 If nothing else that should lead to a funny board report.

 just my thoughts.
 rgds
 jan I

 Ps. it seems markmail does not support inline responses, or am I doing
 something wrong ?


-- 

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: Improving OpenOffice's User Experience

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/15/2014 11:22 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 08/05/2014 Brennan Novak wrote:

Here is a link explaining the current user experience flow which I
experienced as a major pain point this morning trying to file my
first OpenOffice bug report:
https://brennannovak.com/notes/432


Thanks for this! How come you started from the SourceForge mirrors 
page? Well, indeed at times users follow paths that one could not 
imagine.
With SourceForge being the official download location, it is an obvious 
place to start.  We should take a look at those pages with this process 
in mind.
That said, I tried the Google with file a bug openoffice and it led me 
to this page (first hit):
Report Bugs: Quality Assurance - OpenOffice.org 
http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/ooQA-ReportBugs.htmlbvm=bv.66699033,d.b2k


I think that does a pretty good job of describing the important information.



And probably at step 4 you missed to note that you were also taken to 
the wiki, that in turn sent you back to the main openoffice.org site 
since the instructions there are more detailed. It must have been 
fun in some way, but it is something we can definitely streamline.


Do you know what the assumed user path was? We assumed that you 
would open http://openoffice.org then click on Contact Us and see 
the If you want to submit a bug report... section in 
http://www.openoffice.org/contact_us.html which would have taken you 
to the right place.



I realize that making it easier to file bugs will probably increase
your volume of bugs filed (certainly a mixed blessing)


We have an intermediate Contact us page that we could use to prevent 
Bugzilla from being flooded. I opened 
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124912 to capture your 
suggestions, let's see if we manage to improve this in the next version.



I have numerous other improvement ideas I have encountered in the
setup and updating flows of OpenOffice and would be willing to share
them, so long as it is helpful to your team!


Sure it is! If you have any other suggestions, please share them. Some 
will be easy to implement, some will take more time or need 
discussion, but it will be very good to hear your ideas.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0 (RC4)

[Andrew Rist]

+1
Tested on 2 platforms and build from scratch.
Let's get this out there...

A.

On 4/28/2014 8:30 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

+1 from me.

I did my standard testing on 3 platforms, build the src release and
think it will be a very solid and good version. I used a snapshot build
(later the Beta, RC's) since weeks for my daily work ...

Juergen

On 4/25/14 5:11 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

Hi all,

this is a call for vote on releasing the available release candidate
(RC4) as Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0.

Apache OpenOffice 4.1 is a minor update with many bugfixes and at least
2 major improvements. It's the first version where we have the
iAccessibility2 support integrated and available. A very huge step
forward to reach and better support disabled users especially on
Windows. The second improvement is the switch to 64 bit on MacOS. A long
and overdue must do shift forward to support newer APIs (replace
deprecated APIs)  and platforms on MacOS.
And we can provide again more complete UI translations and have now
support for 38 languages. New languages for this release compared to
4.0.1 are Bulgarian, Danish, Hebrew, Hindi, Norwegian Bokmal and Thai.

Apache OpenOffice 4.1 will be a further key milestone to continue the
success of OpenOffice.

An overview of the integrated release issues can be found under:

http://people.apache.org/~jsc/milestones/4.1.0-rc4/AOO4.1.0_RC4_fixes.html

The RC4 fixed 2 further problems:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124682
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124701

RC3:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124617
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124639

RC2:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124599
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124607
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124509
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124394


The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
releases for 38 languages) and further information how to verify and
review Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0 can be found on the following wiki page:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds

(alternative directly via
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/milestones/4.1.0-rc4)

*.dmg files are currently not recognized as binaries and have to be
saved manually (save link as ...).

The RC is based on the release branch AOO410, revision 1589052! And a
fresh and clean RAT scan output of this revision can be found under

http://people.apache.org/~jsc/milestones/4.1.0-rc4/AOO4.1.0_RAT_Scan.html

Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0

The vote starts now and will be open until:

Monday, 28 April: 2014-04-28 10:00pm UTC+2.

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 4.1.0
[ ]  0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: Anything we can do about premature redistribution?

[Andrew Rist]

On 3/7/2014 6:22 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

Evidently we're already released, on some websites at least:

http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Apache-OpenOffice-253.shtml

Also, what of the Editor's review?

   It is derived from the IBM Lotus Symphony suite of applications...
   - not correct

   Under the hood, Apache OpenOffice is translated in over 170
   languages... - not correct

   It is also very important to mention here that the well known
   LibreOffice open source office suite is based on the source code of
   this application.  - hmmm - correct, but, not the traditional LO
   formulation

   Ever since the Oracle Corporation acquired the Sun Microsystems
   company, work on Apache OpenOffice ceased, and various developers
   who worked on the project decided to create a new project, named
   LibreOffice. - neither correct nor pertinent

   Because of this, LibreOffice is now the main choice for any Linux
   distribution developer who wants to pre-install a complete and open
   source office suite application in their operating system(s).




How much do we care about this?   The risk, I suppose, is on
Softpedia, that we could find a last-minute defect in the NOTICE or
other legal files, and they find themselves distributing a package
that is not correct.  But the practical risk there is small.

The greater risk is to users, that we find a last-minute fatal bug
that causes us to cancel the vote, but there are versions of the
Release Candidate still floating around.  That can hurt the AOO
reputation if that happened.

I'm not sure we can prevent this from happening, and still have an
open and transparent voting process.  But maybe there is something we
can do to discourage it?

-Rob

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: [LAZY CONSENSUS] maintenance of ooo-wiki2-vm.a.o and ooo-forums.a.o

[Andrew Rist]

+1

(just getting back to the list - too much holiday - not enough AOO - 
also not enough snow here...)


On 12/29/2013 7:09 AM, jan i wrote:

top posting.

A friendly reminder, this LAZY Consensus proposal runs until january 2nd.

Until now, no -1 has been received.

Andrea is the only team member that has given a +1

the other team members (jsc, imacat, arist) have not expressed any opinion
yet.

Wish you all a happy new year.
rgds
jan I.



On 28 December 2013 17:39, Andrew Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote:


I have been following as best I can while traveling, and it is not my
place to say, but I agree

jan i j...@apache.org wrote:


On 28 December 2013 16:19, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:


On 22/12/2013 jan i wrote:


based on a polite push from a good infra colleague,  I have decided to
present yet another proposal for maintaining ooo-wiki2-vm.a.o and
ooo-forums.a.o


I agree with the proposal, so +1 from me.

The main value it brings is that we will have a common (and lightweight)
set of rules that allow us to establish some initial guidelines. This

will

make it easier to include new volunteers later, or promote existing
volunteers to sysadmin role, or do whatever we agree upon, at due time.

But

we need an initial set of guidelines to work effectively as a team.


thanks for your +1, thats the first of the existing team, I still hope the
rest of the team will join. The intention of the proposal is NOT to

exclude

anybody, it (as andrea write very nicely) to make a basis on which we can
build, while securing our servers.





  I suggest myself for sysadm, and jsc, pescetti, arist and imacat for

vm-team. Of course my suggestion depends on the willingness of the
mentioned people.


I'm willing to be part of team as proposed.

thx, your input and help is much valued.

Remember there are 3 days left of this year, if you have something to

catch

up on.

rgds
jan I.



Regards,
   Andrea.

-
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

Re: buildbots -- Linux and MacOSX

[Andrew Rist]

I wanted to give an update on the buildbots, as this is a question that 
keeps coming up.


 * We've received assurances that the Mac buildbot is coming. Long
   story short, the current mac hardware is a bit long in the tooth and
   we would kill everything on it if we added our builds to the current
   machine.  We are waiting for real hardware in the form of a Mac Pro
   which will enable us to have multiple virtualized mac bots, giving
   us our own environment that can be set up for AOO.  The machine
   should be ordered by the end of the year - bot should come up early
   next year - ish...
 * We are also waiting on a CentOS bot to create our standard Linux
   build.  This has been requested and is in the works, and Jan has
   agreed to bring this up in discussions with infra.  I am hoping we
   can have this for the 4.1 release timeframe.
 * FreeBSD bot - we have a new freebsd bot and it is slowly moving
   toward building without errors.  If anyone has suggestions for
   fixing issues on there, please post to dev and we'll move that
   forward.  We are currently stuck on Hunspell -
   
http://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-fbsd-nightly/builds/91/steps/configure/logs/stdio
   and
   
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/buildlogs/fbsdn/log/unxfbsdx.pro.build.html
 * The hung process issue with the windows buildbots seems to solved
   now, and has not been a problem lately.
 * Currently the Windows bots are failing - but this seems to an issue
   of svn getting out of sync, I'm cleaning up the bot and restarting
   the machine after some updates - I expect this to clean up the
   current issues.  (
 * Snapshots - both linux and windoze are currently having issues in
   terms of the size of files that the build creates.  The standard
   buildbot directory upload routine zips the directory, uploads it,
   and unzips at the destination.  Our directory of install bits has
   gotten too large and we are running into an exception on this
   step.   (On long term fix is to create our own custom directory
   upload code for build bot - but that is another discussion...)  The
   short term solution is to split the snapshot build into two builds 
   (possible in a single flow) and build half the languages in each

   build - this should get us around the space issue.

That's all for now
A.



On 11/13/2013 10:01 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Glenn Harvey Liwanag 
glennharveyliwa...@gmail.com wrote:


I can try building the thing on my Mac OS X if that's what you're looking
for. It's my only computer right now and I use it for school so I have to
know first the average build time and the instructions to get the whole
thing done without academics interfering with the work.


Thanks for this offer! Resources used for building are dependent on your
system, but typically it would take about 2 hours for a full build.

Information on how to obtain the source and a link to the Building Guide
can be found on the project source page:

  http://openoffice.apache.org/source.html

Please let us know how this goes for you.



On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:


Regarding Jürgen's comments  on a recent thread --

http://markmail.org/message/v5zli2np67qv5ryz

Since  CentOS 5 is our reference distribution for delivered Linux

binaries

(I did not know this!) -- and I am assuming this distro might remain as

the

reference going forward, does it make sense to try to move forward to set
this up as a buildbot. I know wokr had already started on this. Can

someone

give us an update?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6217

I don't know CentOS, but having about 18  years in various *nixes HP/UX,
Solaris, RedHat, SuSE), I could probably help assuming I could work in
command line only to deal with this.

On the MacOSX front, the latest update indicates we don't have hardware

:(

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4902

Any suggestions? Volunteers with equipment to dedicate to this?



--



-

MzK

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
  Nothing is going to get better. It's not.”
   -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax

Re: Call for Automation BVT volunteer for AOO4.1

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/5/2013 10:32 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote:


I reported this a while back:
http://markmail.org/message/x2plcngb6xczxbch


yes...we have NIGHTLY 32 bit RPMS buildt from trunk  but not snapshot
builds -- those built from the snapshot trunk -- at the moment.


I believe the rpm was failing on the snapshot, and I did not have the 
time to sort that.  I'll try with the rpms, and if it succeeds we'll 
leave that running.


A.







On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Liu Ping doneyours...@gmail.com wrote:


Hi ,Kay
Maybe you can get RPM packs for 32-bit Linux snapshot. from
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/


Hi. These snapshot packs are all deb format, not rpm. I don't know

what

the decisions were concerning these setups.

OK. I will see what I can find out about this. There ARE nightly Linux-32
rpm packs but not from the SNAPSHOT trunk.




On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com

wrote:

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Liu Ping doneyours...@gmail.com

wrote:

Hi, all.

BVT(Build Verification Testing)  is a set of tests that run on new

build

to

verify that whether the build is testable or not,  which play an

important

role in software quality

Encourage more efforts in community to engage in automation BVT

  for

AOO

4.1 (refer item 5 in AOO 4.1 Test Arrangement)

  (1)First, Welcome volunteers familiar with BVT according by the

guidence

http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/BVT


Hi --

Currently, there are no RPM packs for 32-bit Linux snapshot.
Does anyone know why?



   Below are prerequisites:

1) 1)Environment tool: SVN Client, JDK, Ant

2) 2)Soft Skills:

· a.Basic skills about Windows Command line,
Linux/Mac Terminal

· b.Basic knowledge of Java

If have some problems, please put forward issues that block you. I

will

help to resolve it.

(2)Second, Notice new build and collect volunteers’ BTV result.

Please post your name/email and your platform , When new build is

ready

  I

will notice by email.

Volunteer  post your result on
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/BVT_Report, thx.




--



-

MzK

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
  Nothing is going to get better. It's not.”
   -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax




--


-

MzK

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
  Nothing is going to get better. It's not.”
   -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax




--
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
http://www.openoffice.org
882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9  5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614

-
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

Re: The crux with 2 open standards for more or less the same thing

[Andrew Rist]

On 10/28/2013 12:38 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:

Hello,


From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]

That is the reason why we will start to investigate in a

better OOXML

support for AOO and you will probably notice some more

activity in the

future going in this direction.

Excellent. A better Microsoft compatibility is what our users
set as #1
priority in the user survey and improving OOXML import (and
export!) is
surely part of that.

This is a pragmatic way, also a necessary way, but I fear it will be in the long
run, even the death of the current ODF.

No user of MS Office will move more of OOXML to ODF, if the compatibility of 
OOXML
in AOO will be similar as well of *.doc.

It is not wrong to improve compatibility with OOXML, but that will unfortunately
be the side effect. I think that you should see clearly.

We must also see that the need to improve the compatibility with OOXML,
unfortunately, also an expression of the fact that market dominance continues to
have MS Office .

I look at what happens at the ISO, where they talked some time ago by the 
merging
of the two standards ( ODF and OOXML), and take statements from experts 
seriously,
it seems to me the path mapped out, there will be a new standard in the future,
even if no one likes to hear.

http://xkcd.com/927/


We should all prepare ourselves to it and work on it that it prevents the MS 
this
standard does not dominate. That's what we should see as a long term goal.
I am thinking there must be cooperation between _all_ the OSS projects will use
the ODF.


Greetings,
Jörg



-
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

Re: Extensions

[Andrew Rist]

On 10/25/2013 12:48 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 10/25/13 1:25 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

Vladislav Stevanovic wrote:

We had in Serbia simmilar problem with one of the most-frequently-used
extension in Serbian. Thanks for Jörg Schmidt he made version for AOO
4.0,
but we have still some problems here, because old version of this
extension
is still visible on AOO Extension site! It is silent message for all:
this
is not working on AOO, but here is on our site.

Indeed, we must do something about this. PDF Import is another excellent
example: people do not read that the 4.0-compatible version is available
as a different extension and keep complaining and believing that a
4.0-compatible version does not exist... this creates confusion,
misunderstandings and a huge waste of time for support.

we can simply define a rule that unmaintained extension will be removed
when the owner doesn't reply on mail requests.

That means we can send a mail to the owner and if he doesn't reply at
all or is not willing to add these information, we remove the extensions
completely.
It would be better to create a separate area - like the attic - to hold 
these.  It would be less offending than just removing them.
I understand that the proposal is to reach out and only remove those 
that are unresponsive, but I think that this will be seen as heavy handed.


Is it possible to create a status of 'In the attic', such that the page 
template gets a big 'old and not maintained' banner?
Or move them to an attic section, leaving behind a forwarding message 
('this extension has been moved to the attic due to lack of maintenance').


A.



It can be quite simple

Juergen



1) Administrators must have create the rule: extensions on AOO site
Extension must declared as appropriate or non-appropriate for AOO4.0.

This is already there. There's compatibility information for all
releases. And we even have a wiki page
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions/Extensions_and_Apache_OpenOffice_4.0

with examples and information.


2) In future we must made restriction for those extensions on our site

I don't get what you would restrict. Do you mean that you would hide
all extensions that are not compatible with 4.0? I think they can
stay... Maybe it is possible to add a warning to the extensions that do
not have releases explicitly compatible with 4.0?


3) There is some the most frequently used extensions. What we can do to
ensure that this extension works in AOO 4.0? Can we invited authors of
this
extensions to made version for AOO4.0? Can we create some fork, if it is
totaly legal (for example, for extensions where authors of extensions do
not want to make corrections for AOO 4.0 and when licence permit forks?

This is complex and I don't know what is best to do. For sure PDF
Import, the most popular extension, the source code for which is in the
OpenOffice sources, is unmaintained and forked (meaning: Ariel
provided a working replacement that is compatible with 4.0), but the
replacement is shadowed by the original extension. Same for the MySQL
Connector. For those two extensions I would suggest to plug in Ariel's
replacements as updates to the original extension, to give them proper
visibility.

But these two extensions are very special cases. In general, forking
will be a mess since it will duplicate extensions and the original one
will still be more visible and outdated. Transfer of ownership
(meaning: the author has no interest or time to update the extension,
but at least he is available to transfer the ownership of the extension
on the Extensions site to another user who is volunteering to create a
4.0-compatible version) would work best.

Regards,
   Andrea.

-
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

Re: [Accessibility] Calc and Impress got complete ia2 support -- (aoo-w7ia2) Buildbot currently failing

[Andrew Rist]

On 9/27/2013 6:44 AM, V Stuart Foote wrote:

Steve,

Great news!  Once we have a useable build...

I just checked and the current r1526782 based ia2 branch is failing snapshot
Buildbot for svn under cygwin

So the (aoo-w7ia2) Buildbot for the ia2 branch again needs some attention.

just gave it some attention and it is running now...
A.


Stuart






--
View this message in context: 
http://openoffice.2283327.n4.nabble.com/Accessibility-Calc-and-Impress-got-complete-ia2-support-tp4653235p4653267.html
Sent from the Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-
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

Re: IA2 Branch r1519381 IAccessible2 testing - failed Buildbot

[Andrew Rist]

the nightly build should be at 
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/w7ia2/Apache_OpenOffice_4.0.0_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe_1519381.exe


On 9/12/2013 12:02 PM, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote:

Hi,

Could you tell me if there's a binary of this branch? I no longer find 
any downloadable binary for OOo with IA2. Did you remove it? is there 
an alternative to do tests?


Thanks.

Sincerely,

Le 12/09/2013 17:51, Steve Yin a écrit :

Thank you all!


On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org wrote:


On 12.09.2013 05:21, V Stuart Foote wrote:


Look to again have a clean and installable build of the IA2 branch --
r1519381 (wef 2013-09-02)-- to start working against.

The latest builds #232 (forced by Andrew) and #233 (regular nightly 
build)

were both successful [1] and built rev 1519381.

[1] 
http://ci.apache.org/projects/**openoffice/http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/


Herbert


--**--**- 

To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org









--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: IA2 Branch r1519381 IAccessible2 testing - failed Buildbot

[Andrew Rist]

Looking at this now - we should be able to get this bot healthy again.
A.

On 9/8/2013 10:13 AM, V Stuart Foote wrote:

Steve Y. has merged the AOO TRUNK into the IA2 branch SVN as r1519381.

Anxious to resume QA work on IAccessibile2 implementation.

Unfortunately, while it looks like the IA2 Buildbot job picked up the
change, it is failing with this error:

2 module(s):
apr
curl
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7ia2/build/main/curl
ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7ia2/build/ext_libraries/apr

This builbot needs a little TLC.

Stuart



--
View this message in 
context:http://openoffice.2283327.n4.nabble.com/IA2-Branch-r1519381-IAccessible2-testing-failed-Buildbot-tp4652027.html
Sent from the Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-
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

Re: User questions on dev mailing list

[Andrew Rist]

On 9/6/2013 4:41 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
snip
Another angle is to realize that enabling the user and motivating them 
in a specific direction is more powerful than trying to steer them 
away from a specific direction. Maybe the problem is we are not making 
the support forums sound attractive enough? Maybe if we said something 
like, For the fastest and most expert response, post your question 
to? Make the forums sound like the most attractive option. We 
know they are the best place for questions, of course. But we ought to 
describe it equally attractively. -Rob 


Perhaps this is a situation of people who are more comfortable with 
email as a tool as opposed to a forum.  If you are not familiar with 
forums in general, our forum can be pretty daunting to navigate - 
there's a lot of info there.


Do we have a way of bridging the two?  Is there a way to have an email 
address (e.g. forum_questi...@openoffice.org) that autoposts to a catch 
all forum topic.  Then after the post was triaged, the poster would be 
autosubscribed for replies?
I have no idea if something like this is possible, but it could provide 
both a bridge to introduce these users to the forum, and a mechanism to 
provide for feedback without having dev become help.


A.





more snip

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Does SNAPSHOT tag need to be changed?

[Andrew Rist]

On 8/27/2013 2:34 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 8/26/13 6:26 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote:


Hi,


On 25.08.2013 23:56, Kay Schenk wrote:


Right now SNAPSHOT is pointing to rev. 1499347.
Does this need to be changed to rev. 1516808?



just for completeness - rev. 1516808 is the current 'head' revision of
branch AOO401.


yes...



As far as I know, we used the SNAPSHOT tag to tag certain revision for
snapshot builds from trunk.




For the recent snapshot build for our way to a AOO 4.0.1 release Jürgen
proposed to build a certain revision from branch AOO401. Thus, just another
approach.



Well maybe I am not understanding the term...I'm looking at Jurgen's
message from 8/22

  http://markmail.org/message/sttjvg642yzqid5z

I thought that as of that day, at whatever revision level that was, the tag
should have been moved. It wasn't, so now we are at a different revision
level in trunk, but?

Mostly the reason I ask is that some builds via buildbot are not working
given the current SNAPSHOT tag -- old.



I think we should continue to use SNAPSHOT tag for snapshot builds from
trunk. May be it should be named TRUNKSNAPSHOT next time it is moved.
For snapshot build from a certain branch, we can continue as in the past -
just announce the revision used for branch snapshot building - or we could
introduce a corresponding tag - may be branch nameSNAPSHOT.


Really, I am mostly asking became of how the buildbots are setup. I think
we should standardize on a process and definition of SNAPSHOT.

I agree and I would like to come to the state where we can simply use
the builds of the build bots and that they are compatible with the
release builds. I still don't know if that is possible today. At least
for Mac we don't have a build bot and we need the 64 bit changes.

Linux build bots are to new and are not comparable with the release
builds Ariel did. Windows is probably close but I don't know for sure if
it the same. For example if the 64 bit shell extensions are build
correct on the Windows bot.

A SNAPSHOT should be a special version where we agree more or less that
it is worth to take a closer look on it from a QA perspective. Nightly
builds are for developers mainly.

At the moment the SNAPSHOT tag is outdated and we build old version
which makes of course no sense.

I will move the tag on the branch for the next build ...

By the way where can I read the information about the setup of the build
bots and what is build when?

https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf
A


Juergen







Best regards, Oliver.

--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-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

[BUILD] Linux32 snapshot configure

[Andrew Rist]

Here is the current configure statement for the Linux32 bot - is this 
correct, and what changes would make it better?


./configure \
--with-jdk-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk \
   --with-epm-url=http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz
\
   
--with-dmake-url=http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2;
   \
--enable-verbose \
--without-stlport \
--enable-category-b \
--enable-opengl \
--enable-dbus \
--enable-gstreamer \
 --with-package-format=installed rpm deb \
 --enable-bundled-dictionaries \
 --with-lang=ast cs de el en-GB en-US es fi fr gd gl hu it
   ja km ko nl pl pt pt-BR ru sk sl ta zh-CN zh-TW ca eu he hi id lt sv
   th tr  \
--with-vendor=Apache OpenOffice buildbot \
--with-build-version=%(today)s-Rev.%(got_revision)s \

Re: Additional languages for buildbots

[Andrew Rist]

On 8/13/2013 1:18 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:

On 13.08.2013 08:42, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

I see that yesterday's buildbot run completed successfully
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
(even though, since we are still building the SNAPSHOT tag, running that
buildbot is only testing that the buildbot works). This is the only one
where we support localization at the moment.

Before we forget, can we add to it at least
zh-TW (unsure aoput the right syntax) km pl kid ?
The first 3 languages are 100% complete in Pootle, kid is the KeyID
and it's useful to translators.


I now added km and zh-TW, pl was already there. Enabling the 
keyid build doesn't make sense until [1] is fixed. The current kid 
localization is quite out of date.


[1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123014

Excellent - I was going to do this, but Herbert beat me to it.





This is only a step in making the new languages available for testing
(the other two being: regenerating the SDF files and moving the SNAPSHOT
tag or equivalent on the buildbot side), but it is independent of the
other actions needed.

And what is preventing us from having at least one Linux buildbot
equivalent to win7snap? I thought disk space was the issue, but from
Andrew's remarks I understood this is no longer problematic under
Windows or Linux.


Last week we ran out of space on the Windows buildbot. When Andrew 
cleaned things out they started working again. With the additional 
languages we are stressing it a bit more now though.
Actually, the situation is not too bad - the disk space issue is under 
control now and we have space for languages as they become available.


The snapshot tag is currently only moved sporadically so spending time 
in setting up new snapshot buildbots for e.g. Linux is an arguable 
investment.

We are waiting on the CentOS bot to set up the Linux 32 snapshot build.
I'm also about to look at the ubuntu bots - now that they're back on , 
it would be good to have them running through correctly.

For most cases the already existing nightly builds are better.
This is something we need to resolve (by making the bot builds better, 
of course) I think the CentOS bot will help us move in that direction.


Herbert

-
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

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrew Rist]

On 7/20/2013 1:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 15/07/2013 Herbert Duerr wrote:

Currently the Windows buildbot of the SNAPSHOT tag does a weekly full
build of all languages:
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#winsnap
Is any fully translated language missing from that list?


Yes, ast.


Should semi-translated languages be built too?


The following have less than 20.000 words left (means, 75%+ done, more 
or less) and should ideally be built too:

ca eu he hi id lt pl sv th tr

ok - I committed this change.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
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

Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC2)

[Andrew Rist]

+1Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0



On 7/17/2013 12:40 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0
[ ]  0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Andrew Rist]

On 7/15/2013 12:19 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 7/15/13 9:04 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 14/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:

In this specific case, for AOO 4.0,  I'm suggesting we release any
additional languages that are 100% on September 16th.  This is similar
to what we did for AOO 3.4.1.  After that date I think we then wait
for AOO 4.1.

Releasing a new language should be rather easy and repeatable, so it is
something that we can do once a month (but I can understand that August
may be problematic due to holidays).

Ideally, we should have a monthly update, say around mid-month, where we:

1) Release new languages (of course, based on the same code revision as
4.0, exactly as done for 3.4.1) that have reached 100% UI translation.

2) Formally unrelated to #1, we make (unreleased) dev snapshots
available of languages that have UI at 75-99%.

People should work on a reliable build bot infra structure that can
provide builds for all major platforms (Linux, Windows, MacOS). And then
we can configure more languages on demand.
While there are periodic complaints about the build bots (e.g.  when 
there are breaking changes made to the source tree), the main bots are 
pretty stable.  They mainly break when broken.  If you look at Windows 
Snapshot build http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7snap/ , the Windows 
nightly build http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/ , and the Linux 
64bit build http://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-nightly/ 
, you will notice that they are quite stable (esp. with the fix to the 
hanging process issue)


We can ask again at infra for our CentOS linux 32 bot and Mac hardware, 
and we have waited long enough on that front.  But, are there any issues 
we can identify with the current Windows snapshot build that make it 
unusable?
We can configure more languages on these bots on demand right now. Is 
there a technical reason you don't like them?


A.




I will be not the manual build bot ;-)

Proposing is fine but please think also about the realization.

Juergen

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Mercurial repository at hg.services.openoffice.org

[Andrew Rist]

On 6/27/2013 9:00 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
The Mercurial repository at http://hg.services.openoffice.org/ is no 
longer current but it is still useful since it contains important 
historical information.


It is still hosted by Oracle and it is now down.

Any plans to restore it?
It will not be restored.  (but there are copies in the wild, the 
https://bitbucket.org/mst/ooo340 one mentioned in this thread, for instance)

Andrew
We might also want to store it (read-only) somewhere at Apache, but 
that resource should remain available.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
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

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/30/2013 6:04 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 29.05.2013 10:35, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:


[snip]



I have seen that #621 of aoo-win7 also had this error and 
that you

had
again cleaned up the hanging processes.

In order to get some error output I will switch off the HTML
output
(no
--html option) and the multiprocessor build (no -P2 -- -P2
options)
before the weekly clean build of aoo-win7 and for the aoo-w7ia2
build
which is always clean.



Build #113 of aoo-w7ia2 went well.
The failure occured just because I forgot to disable the
collection of
the HTML build logs.
I'm confused - was there something wrong with the w7ia2 build.  
The

previous two builds were clean:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2
Other than stumbling over hung processes, I don't think there 
is an

issue with ia2.


We had observed the problem of the hanging process.
#105 had hanging process
#106 went well after your process cleaning
#107, #108, #109, #110 had again problems with hanging processes
#111 went well after your process cleaning
#112 the first successful build without your invention
#113 went well with my first temporary investigation stuff - 
failure

just because of error in copying non-existing HTML logs.
#114 went well with my second investigation stuff

I decided to do some investigation stuff as the problem showed 
up two

times in the last days. Currently, we do not hit the problem. But
when
it occurs again, we will have some more information due to the
different
logging. The problem of the current HTML logging is that we do not
have
it, when the hanging process error occurs.

As #114 went well I will now switch on the default multiprocesses
builds
- 2 modules built in parallel with each using 2 make/dmake 
processes.




#115 build of aoo-w7ia2 having standard multiprocessor builds 
(options

-P2 -- -P2) went well.
I will leave the HTML output switched off until Monday. May be the
problem with the hanging process occurs. Then we have some output 
when

and where it occurs.


#117 build of aoo-w7ia2 showed again the error.
Thus, following #118 build fails - it could not remove
/ext_libraries/apr/wntmcsi12/misc/apr-1.4.5/Makefile.win



Andrew, can you please kill the hanging processes.

Cleaned up - fingers crossed that this works.  great work.


Thanks for the cleaning - #120 build of aoo-w7ia2 went well

I will switch on the HTML output for aoo-w7ia2 again.
I will mark the log collection task to be always performed - may be this
will give us HTML logs even when a failure occurs.



The Bad: #121 build of aoo-w7ia2 failed again.
The Good: The HTML log collection in case of such a failure works.

The HTML logs of #121 (which will be overwritten by the next build) 
reveals that modules apr and sc were built successfully, but the 
'deliver' steps were not performed. I assume this is again caused by 
one (or more) hanging process(es)


@Andrew:
When you have time, please have a look at the machine. If possible, 
please provide information about the hanging processes in case they 
are existing and causing again the failure.

hung process:
cl /nologo /?
with a parent process of:
C:\cygwin\bin\sh.exe -c dmake -P2 verbose=true  [long path]/apr.txt 21
with the parent process of:
[long path]\build.pl --all --html -P -- -P

(all I need to clean up is to kill the cl process, and the others 
eventually exit)

(and it's cleaned up now)
A.





As nobody else showed up I am volunteering to take care for our 
Windows buildbots. Andrew, can you support me to get the corresponding 
karma to have direct access to the machine(s) hosting our Windows 
buildbots?

I'll look for you coming online, and we can do that over IRC


Thanks in advance.


Best regards, Oliver.

-
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

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/27/2013 3:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 27.05.2013 12:00, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:


[snip]



I have seen that #621 of aoo-win7 also had this error and that you
had
again cleaned up the hanging processes.

In order to get some error output I will switch off the HTML output
(no
--html option) and the multiprocessor build (no -P2 -- -P2
options)
before the weekly clean build of aoo-win7 and for the aoo-w7ia2 
build

which is always clean.



Build #113 of aoo-w7ia2 went well.
The failure occured just because I forgot to disable the 
collection of

the HTML build logs.

I'm confused - was there something wrong with the w7ia2 build.  The
previous two builds were clean: 
http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2

Other than stumbling over hung processes, I don't think there is an
issue with ia2.


We had observed the problem of the hanging process.
#105 had hanging process
#106 went well after your process cleaning
#107, #108, #109, #110 had again problems with hanging processes
#111 went well after your process cleaning
#112 the first successful build without your invention
#113 went well with my first temporary investigation stuff - failure
just because of error in copying non-existing HTML logs.
#114 went well with my second investigation stuff

I decided to do some investigation stuff as the problem showed up two
times in the last days. Currently, we do not hit the problem. But when
it occurs again, we will have some more information due to the 
different
logging. The problem of the current HTML logging is that we do not 
have

it, when the hanging process error occurs.

As #114 went well I will now switch on the default multiprocesses 
builds

- 2 modules built in parallel with each using 2 make/dmake processes.



#115 build of aoo-w7ia2 having standard multiprocessor builds (options
-P2 -- -P2) went well.
I will leave the HTML output switched off until Monday. May be the
problem with the hanging process occurs. Then we have some output when
and where it occurs.


#117 build of aoo-w7ia2 showed again the error.
Thus, following #118 build fails - it could not remove
/ext_libraries/apr/wntmcsi12/misc/apr-1.4.5/Makefile.win



Andrew, can you please kill the hanging processes.

Cleaned up - fingers crossed that this works.  great work.
A.




Many thanks in advance.

Best regards, Oliver.

-
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

Re: Find a better name for sidebar?

[Andrew Rist]

SmartPanel ?


On 5/23/2013 11:06 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:

Hello,


From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com]

Would not it make sense to think about the sidebar to give

a distinctive name?


Like Awesome Panel?

I'm not quite sure how your answer is to understand.

(a)
Is Awesome Panel a concrete proposal for a name for the sidebar?

then:
I am correct that you Awesome can translate as super? In this case, I seem 
super-panel as the preferred term because is super internationally, without translation, more 
understandable.

(b)
Or Awesome panel is just a general word to clarify what I mean by distinctive 
name?

then:
Yes, I mean a word of this kind


general:
I think now the resonance is on my post, total, too low, and I think Juergen is 
right that we currently have better things to do. I'm not so excited about it, 
but it's probably that.


Greetings,
Jörg


-
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

Re: Find a better name for sidebar?

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/23/2013 3:52 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
I don't if it's really to late for finding a handy name for the 
biggest new feature in AOO. This has to be defined by others. :-)


However, if we have some time, I have to say that SuperPanel or 
SmartPanel are good proposals 

and possibly SmartBar   (or is that a snack food?)

what can be done by this UI element:

Use the panel to do you work in a super smart and super fast way. It's 
better to discover your tools and styles in a single location than to 
poke for them in every toolbox and dialog.


My 2 ct.

Marcus



Am 05/23/2013 08:34 PM, schrieb Andrew Rist:

SmartPanel ?


On 5/23/2013 11:06 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:

Hello,


From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com]

Would not it make sense to think about the sidebar to give

a distinctive name?


Like Awesome Panel?

I'm not quite sure how your answer is to understand.

(a)
Is Awesome Panel a concrete proposal for a name for the sidebar?

then:
I am correct that you Awesome can translate as super? In this
case, I seem super-panel as the preferred term because is super
internationally, without translation, more understandable.

(b)
Or Awesome panel is just a general word to clarify what I mean by
distinctive name?

then:
Yes, I mean a word of this kind


general:
I think now the resonance is on my post, total, too low, and I think
Juergen is right that we currently have better things to do. I'm not
so excited about it, but it's probably that.


Greetings,
Jörg


-
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

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/22/2013 3:30 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 21.05.2013 09:53, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 17.05.2013 23:11, Andrew Rist wrote:


[snip]



I have seen that #621 of aoo-win7 also had this error and that you had
again cleaned up the hanging processes.

In order to get some error output I will switch off the HTML output (no
--html option) and the multiprocessor build (no -P2 -- -P2 options)
before the weekly clean build of aoo-win7 and for the aoo-w7ia2 build
which is always clean.



Build #113 of aoo-w7ia2 went well.
The failure occured just because I forgot to disable the collection of 
the HTML build logs.
I'm confused - was there something wrong with the w7ia2 build.  The 
previous two builds were clean: http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2
Other than stumbling over hung processes, I don't think there is an 
issue with ia2.

A.




May be the former errors are related to the multiprocessor build.
I will switch on the multiprocessor build inside each module - -- 
-P2 option for the next build.


Best regards, Oliver.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847

Re: mac build bot (and also for the rest of us).

[Andrew Rist]

I'm pretty sure that is not allowed by the Apple license.  So that 
doesn't solve our problem.
(also, I've not had very good success when trying this type approach in 
the past)


The real solution is to get a Mac buildbot, and we requested this almost 
a year ago: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4902


Andrew



On 5/22/2013 5:01 AM, janI wrote:

Hi.

I have been strugling to get VMs up and running on my local server, so I
can test my changes throughout our supported platforms.

I found this article:
http://lifehacker.com/5583650/run-mac-os-x-in-virtualbox-on-windows

And have talked to a couple of virtualbox people, it actually worksso
this is a recipe to get macOS without having a mac.

Now I need to find a macOS image, but that is different story.

rgds
jan I.




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/17/2013 1:53 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 17.05.2013 01:53, Andrew Rist wrote:




our buildbot building trunk nightly for windows has problems in 
modul

apr since a couple of days.
Unfortunately, the log does provide nothing for a reason not 
known to

me.

Thus, I will try to investigate the problem.
Hopefully, I can change the buildbot script to get the build output
directly on stdout instead of as html. The html output is
currently not
containing the corresponding information about the build of module
apr.



Done and Thx to Herbert triggering a clean build.
Unfortunately, the build was successful. Thus, I assume the reason
that we had no nightly windows builds from trunk since 2013-04-28 
was

that no clean build had been performed.

This is not the case.  The clean build is not the panacea you see it
as.  As mentioned in several other communications, I went onto the 
box

and cleaned up some processes that were hung (win7, win7snap, and
win7ia2).  All built successfully - even though the other two were
incremental.   The hung processes tend to occur /more/ during clean
builds - not all the time, just more often.  Thus, clean builds are
more
likely to create this type of build failure, they are not a fix as
you're suggesting.



Thanks for the information.
In order to have something more tangible for fixing this defect of
hanging build processes I propose to start an corresponding
investigation.
At least we should have a look after each build, esp. after each clean
build, if there are processes which hang.


It seems that this defect just occured with build #105 of aoo-w7ia2 -
see [1]. The build had been killed. I assume that the one or the
other process of this build is still working.
Can somebody with corresponding karma check, if there are again
hanging processes?

[1] http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2/builds/105

The build was not killed - the process that was running didn't report
back in 12000 sec = 200 min or  3+hours
At that point the buildbot tries to clean up, but this is the reaction,
not the root cause.

command timed out: 12000 seconds without output, killing pid 2472
SIGKILL failed to kill process
using fake rc=-1
program finished with exit code -1



That is what I meant by killed - sorry for not expressing myself clear.


When I checked it later, the process was still hung  (thus it's unlikely
that our problem is just with the length of the timeout). This is what
one of these hung processes looks like, and any subsequent builds will
fail if it's not cleaned up, as the processes lock files and block
subsequent compiles of the same package.



Thanks for having a look.
Build #106 of aoo-w7ia2 went well after your clean up.
Unfortunately, build #107 of aoo-w7ia2 had again the same failure as 
build #105.

ok - so I am now killing the hung processes - here is what I find:

 * cl.exe - cl /nologo /?
 * sh.exe - C:\cygwin\bin\sh.exe -c dmake -P2 verbose=true 
   /cygdrive/.../apr.txt 21
 * perl.exe - C:\cygwin\bin\perl.exe E:/.../build.pl --all --html -P2
   -- -P2

when I kill the cl process the other two come to life - i.e. that's the 
hung process
looking in to the html progress page, the build is now finishing without 
reporting errors.


A.




Best regards, Oliver.






Best regards, Oliver.

Andrew, can only you perform such an investigation, because (as far 
as I

know) you are the only who have direct access on the machine?



-
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

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/16/2013 1:31 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 16.05.2013 10:24, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 15.05.2013 21:51, Andrew Rist wrote:


On 5/15/2013 12:03 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 14.05.2013 10:16, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

our buildbot building trunk nightly for windows has problems in modul
apr since a couple of days.
Unfortunately, the log does provide nothing for a reason not known to
me.

Thus, I will try to investigate the problem.
Hopefully, I can change the buildbot script to get the build output
directly on stdout instead of as html. The html output is 
currently not
containing the corresponding information about the build of module 
apr.




Done and Thx to Herbert triggering a clean build.
Unfortunately, the build was successful. Thus, I assume the reason
that we had no nightly windows builds from trunk since 2013-04-28 was
that no clean build had been performed.

This is not the case.  The clean build is not the panacea you see it
as.  As mentioned in several other communications, I went onto the box
and cleaned up some processes that were hung (win7, win7snap, and
win7ia2).  All built successfully - even though the other two were
incremental.   The hung processes tend to occur /more/ during clean
builds - not all the time, just more often.  Thus, clean builds are 
more

likely to create this type of build failure, they are not a fix as
you're suggesting.



Thanks for the information.
In order to have something more tangible for fixing this defect of
hanging build processes I propose to start an corresponding 
investigation.

At least we should have a look after each build, esp. after each clean
build, if there are processes which hang.


It seems that this defect just occured with build #105 of aoo-w7ia2 - 
see [1]. The build had been killed. I assume that the one or the 
other process of this build is still working.
Can somebody with corresponding karma check, if there are again 
hanging processes?


[1] http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2/builds/105
The build was not killed - the process that was running didn't report 
back in 12000 sec = 200 min or  3+hours
At that point the buildbot tries to clean up, but this is the reaction, 
not the root cause.


   command timed out: 12000 seconds without output, killing pid 2472
   SIGKILL failed to kill process
   using fake rc=-1
   program finished with exit code -1

When I checked it later, the process was still hung  (thus it's unlikely 
that our problem is just with the length of the timeout). This is what 
one of these hung processes looks like, and any subsequent builds will 
fail if it's not cleaned up, as the processes lock files and block 
subsequent compiles of the same package.






Best regards, Oliver.


Andrew, can only you perform such an investigation, because (as far as I
know) you are the only who have direct access on the machine?



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [buildbot] investigate nightly windows build

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/16/2013 1:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 15.05.2013 21:51, Andrew Rist wrote:


On 5/15/2013 12:03 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

On 14.05.2013 10:16, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:

Hi,

our buildbot building trunk nightly for windows has problems in modul
apr since a couple of days.
Unfortunately, the log does provide nothing for a reason not known to
me.

Thus, I will try to investigate the problem.
Hopefully, I can change the buildbot script to get the build output
directly on stdout instead of as html. The html output is currently 
not
containing the corresponding information about the build of module 
apr.




Done and Thx to Herbert triggering a clean build.
Unfortunately, the build was successful. Thus, I assume the reason
that we had no nightly windows builds from trunk since 2013-04-28 was
that no clean build had been performed.

This is not the case.  The clean build is not the panacea you see it
as.  As mentioned in several other communications, I went onto the box
and cleaned up some processes that were hung (win7, win7snap, and
win7ia2).  All built successfully - even though the other two were
incremental.   The hung processes tend to occur /more/ during clean
builds - not all the time, just more often.  Thus, clean builds are more
likely to create this type of build failure, they are not a fix as
you're suggesting.



Thanks for the information.
In order to have something more tangible for fixing this defect of 
hanging build processes I propose to start an corresponding 
investigation.

Sounds good...
At least we should have a look after each build, esp. after each clean 
build, if there are processes which hang.
Andrew, can only you perform such an investigation, because (as far as 
I know) you are the only who have direct access on the machine?
This I am not signing up for - I can't really commit to having the time 
to focus on this.  I will help interacting with infra to get access for 
any committer that wants to take this on..
(I will look next time we get one of these and at least specifically 
identify what process is hanging and post that back, but I am afraid the 
debugging of the stack is going to be a bit more involved)

A.


Best regards, Oliver.




A.

(and good catch on the ext_source logs...)


I am now reverting my temporary changes for the buildbot aoo-win7.

Best regards, Oliver.

-
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

Re: Buildbot and Unofficial Developer Builds -- whats up?

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/13/2013 8:42 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:

Hi Stuart,

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:16:55AM +, V Stuart Foote wrote:

Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides
of the project.

So, I understand that we are mid-way through, a full regression
testing of the 4.0 branch at Rev 1478648. But has the project actively
stopped the building of dailys,

No, it's just that trunk was broken since Friday.


and have the cognizant developers been asked to stop posting up their
snapshot builds?

No, Developer Snapshots are built weekly, last one is based on revision
1479864/ rev. 1479897 (this last one is the revision from the snapshot
tag).


If so, fine but would help to know that as it does impact testing of
patches for those of us not rolling our own builds.

Or is it just an unfortunate confluence of events between the build
bots and the hand posted work for our outstanding AOO developers?

In any case the BuildBot site is a mess

true - true
I've been focused on other things and have not had time to watch over 
this.  What is still alive is now back on track.

(  http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ ) with even the Linux
64-bit now failing.  And since the  Development Snapshot Builds - full
installation sets
(  
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshotfullsets)
are not labeled with the SVN revision

This is a bug (at least on the Linux builds), thanks for reporting it
(CentOS subversion is 1.6 and I checked the snapshot with 1.7 on other
system, so svn info fails).

Linux64 had a bug that got fixed, and it is now building.
The Windows bots all had hung processes (building apr) with I've cleaned 
up.  and are building now.
Linux32 bots are waiting on infra to recreate the linux32 - we've asked 
them to create a CentOS 5 32bit bot (say that 5 times fast) Once we have 
that, we should be able to produce the correct set of bits for linux 
platform.

As this is non-standard, it is waiting in the infra JIRA queue.
We are also waiting on Mac and FBSD bots.  (before the cry is raised to 
loud, let's please remember that we have the ability to suck up rather 
large amounts of bandwidth and disk space, so we have to be mindful of 
not overwhelming the resources that exist - that said, it would be nice 
to get these resources for the project)







it is frustrating to download
and end-up not having  a current build to test latest patches.

IMHO it is better to use the Developer Snapshots, and if a developer
tells you that s/he has fixed the bug in trunk, wait for the next
developer snapshot to confirm. Of course, you are free to download
a nightly build, but as you've seen they are not always available.
I think it would be best if we had buildbot builds that we trust. We 
have snapshot builds now, and if they do not build the right thing, we 
should fix them, not discount them.


A.





Regards



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [build] source of epm source package no longer available

[Andrew Rist]

On 5/2/2013 12:22 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:

On 02.05.2013 00:57, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:


On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:03:10 +0200
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote:


Hi,

On 29.04.2013 10:02, Rory O'Farrell wrote:

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:22:16 +0200
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote:


Hi,

I have just noticed that the epm source package - build requirement

for

Linux platform - is no longer available via [1] as easysw.com has

closed

its doors. This is also the reason why our working Linux buildbots

could

not successfully perform the build.

Does somebody has an alternative download URL?

[1] http://ftp.easysw.com/pub/epm/3.7/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz


Best regards, Oliver.



A quick search suggests that the source is moving to
http://www.msweet.org/projects.php?Z2

More details are given at
http://www.msweet.org/about.php



Thanks for providing this possible new resource.
My quick search was not as sucessful as yours.


Sorry
  my last post go away, as posts sometimes do!

I use the term quick search to mean here is what looks like a 
good hit

- I haven't time to search further.

It is worth reading the details at the second URL - the code is the 
same,

from the same author - the transfer is due to commercial restructuring.


--
Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie


The correct link (4.2) seems to be:

http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-4.2-source.tar.bz2

But, since we have epm in extras already -- well 3.7. For some reason I
thought the builds got the packs from extras if the link failed, or 
is this

a configure option that would need to be changed?


Epm is treated special, like dmake, because of its GPL license. We 
would have dropped epm but we still don't have a replacement.


There is also the version that we use at the moment:
http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz
it even has the right MD5 checksum so we don't have to change 
main/epm/makefile.mk


The only thing that has to be changed is configure.in, where there is 
a suggestion for the download (line 132 where the --with-epm-url 
option is defined).


But copying it to apache extras would probably be better.

Any volunteers to make the necessary changes?



changes made and linux 64 build kicked off...




-Andre





-
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

links to incubator on download

[Andrew Rist]

Seems that the 'get involved' links in the message you see when 
downloading still point to the incubator version of our URL

http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.1/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.1_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe/download

Roberto,
Is this something you can fix?

Thanks,
Andrew

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Translation for AOO 4.0

[Andrew Rist]

On 4/25/2013 1:16 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 4/25/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:

On 25 April 2013 07:34, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:


On 4/24/13 11:34 PM, janI wrote:

On 24 April 2013 22:33, Juergen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:


Am Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:06 schrieb janI:

On 24 April 2013 16:25, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:


On 4/22/13 10:50 PM, janI wrote:

On 22 April 2013 22:27, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com



snip snip snip

But again, if the general opinion is, that is better to keep a selfmade
deadline and release a half finished product, it would not be fair of me

to

stand in the way.

See above, I think we have to hold our deadlines to show confidence to
the outside. But we can of course improve our planning in the future.

Or we should think about a real train model where we release every 3 or
4 month. But where we maintain also a more stable branch where we fix
mainly bugs and potential security fixes.

this would be a good idea for minor/maintenance releases but not for a

major release.

However, it seems I am the only one with this concern, so I will silence
myself. You
are the voted in release maneger (which I highly support) so according the
apache way,
it is your call together with a majority vote is a release is acceptable.

I simply volunteered to do this task, I am happy if somebody else steps
in ;-)

And in general I share your opinion that releases should not have 100%
fixed dates but should more take the planned features into account.
Fixed dates result often in poor software or poor quality. But I believe
we have to find a compromise and what's possible and to show the
necessary confidence to the public about the progress in the project and
in the product. It's not easy ...

Juergen

Have we discussed, as a project, the tradeoffs that we are making 
here?   On one hand we have solid decisions on the release made by 
Jürgen which trim features, but lead to a predictable, stable, and 
complete release.  On the other hand, we have we have the reasonable 
question by Jan, as to whether there is an alternative approach that 
sacrifices the schedule (i.e. pushing back release date) for the 
features.  My question is Do we have a solid understanding of this 
trade-off, and should we make this decision as a project?


To me there are three major changes that would be good to be in AOO 4.0 
which are currently in jeopardy:


 * Accessibility - the integration of iA2 - work is ongoing. This has a
   major impact on the product, and the ability of large corporations
   and governmental agencies to embrace the product.
 * New Translation Infrastructure - this is the major change to use the
   po files directly in the code, the consolidation of the poo files,
   and the new pootle server infrastructure.
 * Brand Refresh - this work is moving along now, but there is some
   question as to how much of this project can be completed in the
   timeframe necessary.  (logo + icons/resources + full brand/splash
   screens + color schemes + ??)


I see  a few directions that this could go:

1. Follow the current trajectory and push off a significant amount of
   originally planned 4.0 work to 4.1
2. Push off the release by 3 months and get all of these features in
   completely
3. Hold the release indefinitely, waiting of these features


I think that pretty much everyone would disagree with option #3.
Option #1 is a solid option, but I think that there is some portion of 
our community that is not fully comfortable with this.


That leaves us with option #2, which is not perfect, either. Do we have 
estimates from each of the deferred features how long they would need to 
be complete (with a reasonably high confidence level)?  If the time 
frame would be 6 months instead of 3 months, would anyone be comfortable 
with that?


Could we explore option #2 as a project, and get the answers to these 
questions?  Then with a more full understanding, can we make a decision 
as a project for #1 over #2 (or vice versa)?


A

Re: buildbot exception in ASF Buildbot on aoo-w7snap

[Andrew Rist]

Interesting timing on this.  Here is an example of a clean run. This is 
the snapshot build kicked off by Herbert this morning.
It hit an exception 9 hours later.  My guess if that there is a hung 
process on the box that finally timed out.
This is exactly the type of situation that makes clean builds 
problematic on the win bot.
That said, Andre's proposal of fixing it rather than avoiding it is 
certainly the right direction.

(I have passed him some information offlist to help in debugging this)

A.


On 4/15/2013 3:35 PM, build...@apache.org wrote:

Hi! , The aoo-w7snap builder has just completed a run

STATUS: Exception

  Build revision 1468069 on branch None

  Snapshot results at: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/

  Build using the ASF buildslave: bb-win7

  Build results at: http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7snap/builds/47

  Build reason was: forced: by IRC user hdu_hh on channel #asftest: clean 
build after snapshot tag moved


  Yours Sincerely - The ASF Buildbot (http://ci.apache.org/)
--

  Join the bui...@apache.org mailing list for help with Buildbot







-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Build breaker and clean build

[Andrew Rist]

On 4/11/2013 12:06 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:

On 10.04.2013 18:57, Andrew Rist wrote:


On 4/10/2013 1:33 AM, Herbert Dürr wrote:

On 2013/04/10 10:09 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:

tonight we had a build breaker in the windows build: a slot id that is
used in SW had been removed in SVX.  The reference in SW had also been
removed, so this change should not be a problem.
But the windows build is still not a full build.  Therefore the old SW
slot header files where used and the build broke.

There is an easy fix for situations like this: a clean build.


Incremental build are known to have problems thats why I suggested 
[1] to default to a clean build. That didn't receive consensus 
though and indeed there are good reasons against it:


The incremental build both tests the dependency system and it 
reduces the load when building significantly.


On the already strained buildbot this means a factor of almost five 
improvement as clean build takes about 4.5h whereas an incremental 
build takes only 0.5-1.0h.


Andrew even had to reschedule the snapshot build away from the 
weekly clean build because the buildbot load is a real problem.


[1] http://markmail.org/message/wmlhc5f5zaiiyu2o
[2] http://markmail.org/message/7q64ijlwygdqmwf3

Just to add here, that there are also issues with a clean build. The 
clean build fails with some frequency on hung jobs and requires 
manual attention.


That is one more reason to have more frequent clean builds so that we 
can find the cause of these problems.  They are not restricted to the 
build bot.   Others are affected, too.  I would have tried to fix 
this, but I am not able to reproduce this problem on my local machine.


Sorry, I think I was unclear there.  Due to the complexity of our build 
process and the interaction with the buildbot, there is a reasonably 
high incidence of false positive failures on clean builds.  The Windows 
build ends up with hung processes and throws an exception.  If we were 
to switch to clean builds we could expect several false positives a 
week, which would require manual intervention.  We have tests of clean 
builds daily on the linux boxes, so in terms of coverage of the entire 
AOO buildbot setup, we have full builds covered.   I see the fact that 
some of our builds are incremental and some are clean, as a feature, not 
as a shortcoming.




In reality, breaking changes that require a clean build are pretty 
rare.  For me, the clean build on the weekend and incremental during 
the week seems to be a good compromise.


I am not sure about that.   Besides, it is sometimes a bit difficult 
to judge 'how incompatible' a change really is.  Change a slot 
definition in SVX and its use in SW.  Do we need anything more? With a 
clean build we are on the safe side.
It's a trade off.  How many false positives to you get, and how much 
manual intervention does the system require.   What I'm trying to 
communicate is that my experience with 'this buildbot setup' suggests 
that the current approach requires less of my time to keep healthy, and 
produces less false positives.


Besides, the clean-build-on-weekend policy would require us to hold 
all incompatible changes until Friday, or live with a broken build 
during the week.
I really thing that we need a better solution.  A switch for marking a 
change as incompatible and that would be interpreted by the build bot 
would be the absolute minimum.  But even that would call for trouble.  
At Sun we have been there and it did not really work so well.
This doesn't require waiting until the weekend, it requires a manual 
clean run which can be kicked off easily.  (I'm happy to show you, or 
hit up Herbert - he has access, too)   I don't disagree with your 
general argument, I just see different trade-offs, and I consider this 
type failure to have a fairly trivial recovery (kicking off a manual 
clean build).


Andrew





This may become important in the coming weeks when we have to fix some
bugs in the sidebar (which is about to be merged back into trunk).  
The

sidebar is implemented in several modules.  Without a clean windows
build we will run into build breakers very regularly.


It is possible to force a clean build manually.

I'm cleaning it up now and kicking off a build.


Thanks for taking care of this one.

-Andre


Andrew




Herbert


-
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

Re: Build breaker and clean build

[Andrew Rist]

On 4/10/2013 1:33 AM, Herbert Dürr wrote:

On 2013/04/10 10:09 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:

tonight we had a build breaker in the windows build: a slot id that is
used in SW had been removed in SVX.  The reference in SW had also been
removed, so this change should not be a problem.
But the windows build is still not a full build.  Therefore the old SW
slot header files where used and the build broke.

There is an easy fix for situations like this: a clean build.


Incremental build are known to have problems thats why I suggested [1] 
to default to a clean build. That didn't receive consensus though and 
indeed there are good reasons against it:


The incremental build both tests the dependency system and it reduces 
the load when building significantly.


On the already strained buildbot this means a factor of almost five 
improvement as clean build takes about 4.5h whereas an incremental 
build takes only 0.5-1.0h.


Andrew even had to reschedule the snapshot build away from the weekly 
clean build because the buildbot load is a real problem.


[1] http://markmail.org/message/wmlhc5f5zaiiyu2o
[2] http://markmail.org/message/7q64ijlwygdqmwf3

Just to add here, that there are also issues with a clean build. The 
clean build fails with some frequency on hung jobs and requires manual 
attention.
In reality, breaking changes that require a clean build are pretty 
rare.  For me, the clean build on the weekend and incremental during the 
week seems to be a good compromise.



This may become important in the coming weeks when we have to fix some
bugs in the sidebar (which is about to be merged back into trunk).  The
sidebar is implemented in several modules.  Without a clean windows
build we will run into build breakers very regularly.


It is possible to force a clean build manually.

I'm cleaning it up now and kicking off a build.
Andrew




Herbert


-
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

Re: Shell access to LAMP machines

[Andrew Rist]

On 4/3/2013 8:22 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 01/04/2013 janI wrote:
A volunteer does not need to be an expert, that can be learned, 
possibility

to react swiftly to alers in your TZ is the key. General knowledge about
mysql/php is a clear advantage. In general we talk about 1-2 hours 
work pr

month, not including upgrades.


Adding to what Jan wrote: we now have more granular access levels, so 
that we can have a class of volunteers who can only restart services 
(which is often enough in case of a sudden problem). This means you 
shouldn't be scared of having too many privileges and possibly break 
the setup, since privileges will be exactly enough to do what is needed.


We can give these privileges a couple of volunteers if available, 
don't be shy! You need to be an OpenOffice committer and have a 
reasonable knowledge of Linux system administration (not much, but at 
least being able to manage services from the command line). Again, 
American timezones are not covered at the moment so it's best to have 
volunteers from there, but any help is welcome. Anyone?


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



I'll raise my hand for US TZ - though that doesn't there isn't plenty of 
room for others here to step up.

Who else is willing to help?   (don't be shy!)
Remember - as a project, we said that the Wiki, Forums, and Translate 
were needed on their existing platforms, and that we would help.

Now's the time, as they need some TLC.

Andrew


(my joining the effort may or may not have come about through some 
fairly effective lobbying on the part of JanIV - I'll never tell)




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Wiki VM maintenance

[Andrew Rist]

A quick heads up on the wiki.o.o - I've been chatting with infra and due 
to hardware issues, the

VM will to move to another host tomorrow during European time (well, BST)
Anyone wanting to help (usual suspects - Jan? imacat??? Wiki admins) out 
should monitor the infra IRC tomorrow


Andrew


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

OS for main AOO buildbots

[Andrew Rist]

In discussions with infra, (mine and Andrea's) an idea has been hatched 
to create a CentOS buildbot.

This would replace the defunct linux32 bot (previously ubuntu 10.4).
In addition to changing the OS, we will also build this on the machine 
currently hosting the linux64 build.
That bot has a whole machine to itself, so instead of a lightly used 
linux64 bot, the idea is to have a heavily
used linux32 bot, with a flow for (most) every branch, for snapshots, 
and potentially for automated testing.


Here's the question:

What version of CentOS do we want on this machine?  We want the snapshot 
builds to be fully usable.
(are there any other requirements we need to consider when building this 
machine?)



A.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: linux 32 buildbots offline, does anyone know anything about this

[Andrew Rist]

On 3/22/2013 9:19 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

Hi,

It seems the linux 32-bit buildbot processes have been offline for about a
week.


Actually, they've been down for a bit longer than that.  We had kind of 
overwhelmed the available resources, so we were waiting for the new VM 
host to come online.  It is now up, and we are waiting for the linux32 
VMs to get spun up on the new host.


A.


See:

http://ci.apache.org/builders

Does anyone know anything about this, or should we submit a ticket to infra?

Thanks.




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

w7snap build error

[Andrew Rist]

The snapshot of the sidebar branch is failing on officecfg/Office/UI
seems there's a tag missing in xcu file...

   Error: Missplaced close tag: /oor:component-data in file 
E:\slave14\aoo-w7snap\build\main\officecfg\registry\data\org\openoffice\Office\UI\Sidebar.xcu in line 
640: /oor:component-data
   dmake:  Error code 13, while making 
'../../../../../../wntmsci12.pro/misc/merge/org/openoffice/Office/UI/Sidebar.xcu'
   dmake:  
'../../../../../../wntmsci12.pro/misc/merge/org/openoffice/Office/UI/Sidebar.xcu'
 removed.

Re: [Call For QA Volunteers] AOO UI IAccessible2 testing work

[Andrew Rist]

Do you all know about this?
http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2/
We now have an automatic build of the ia2 branch running nightly. (and 
successfully)
It is not loading up install bits for some reason, but I'll look at that 
and fix it.


If you want to see the status of the latest build look for Windows ia2 
Branch on this page:

http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
that page links to the build logs 
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/buildlogs/w7ia2/log/wntmsci12.pro.build.html 
and the buildbot log http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7ia2/builds/6, 
and should have the latest build of the install packages.


Andrew



On 2/9/2013 10:05 AM, V Stuart Foote wrote:

Steve,

Nothing substantive yet in working through the Windows build of the ia2 branch. 
Should we build against Linux and OSX and be testing for impact on ATK/AT-SPI 
and NSAccessibility User Interface?

And, with QA and testing of the ia2 branch proceeding what mechanism should 
folks use for reporting and tracking issues on the ia2 branch builds?

Should we stay with PM and ML exchanges, or start to use Bugzilla at 
issues.apache.org/ooo?  I believe that starting with BZ tracking now  provides 
continuity upon merge of branch back into AOO4.00.

And, if into Bugzilla, would suggest a note in your AOO 4.0 IAccessible2 
release planning wiki that  QA participants and casual users report in Bugzilla 
categorized for consistency as against:

Product: UI
Component: AccessBridge
Version: AOO4.00-dev

Stuart

=-=-=

Sidebar--the legacy IAccessible2 enhancement bug could probably be revised
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=107914

And here is a generic BZ search for accessibility issues
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?query_format=advancedresolution=---short_desc=msaa%20accessible%20iaccessible%20iaccessible2%20accessibilityshort_desc_type=anywordssubstrorder=component%2Cpriority%2Cbug_severityquery_based_on=

Re: buildbot failure in ASF Buildbot on aoo-w7snap

[Andrew Rist]

Can anyone help with debugging the Windows snapshot build?
It dies building shell - source/win32/sysmail
with :

dmake:  Error: -- `simplemapi.hxx' not found, and can't be made

http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/buildlogs/winsnap/log/wntmsci12.pro.build.html


On 1/30/2013 10:39 AM, build...@apache.org wrote:

Hi! , The aoo-w7snap builder has just completed a run

STATUS: Failure

  Build revision 1439888 on branch None

  Snapshot results at: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/

  Build using the ASF buildslave: bb-win7

  Build results at: http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-w7snap/builds/25

  Build reason was: forced: by IRC user arist on channel #asftest: should 
build as nightly built


  Yours Sincerely - The ASF Buildbot (http://ci.apache.org/)
--

  Join the bui...@apache.org mailing list for help with Buildbot

Re: Adapt the naming of our project deliverables - OpenOffice.org -- Apache OpenOffice

[Andrew Rist]

On 1/17/2013 2:45 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote:


Hi,

I have finished the renaming from OpenOffice.org to Apache OpenOffice
- see issue 121388.

Beside corresponding changes in the user interface this change has impact
on the following important and critical stuff:
- folder/directory names
- package names
- Windows registry key names and values
- ...

As the folder/directory path to the user profile is also changed, the user
profile of a former installed AOO (or OOo) version is not taken over.

If possible, please review the changes in your environment/platform.
I am asking especially our community members working on the BSD platform,
Solaris platform and OS/2 platform to have a deeper look.

minor note:
We are still on version number 3.5.0.
I will work on issue 119977 to adapt the version number to 4.0. I think
I will provide the corresponding patch soon, but I will wait with the
integration in order to have enough time for testing the renaming to
Apache OpenOffice.


Best regards, Oliver.


I have a quick question but the issue seems to answer this.

This should be included in buildbot output for trunk currently, correct?

Given Juergen's recent message about tag SNAPSHOT, I'm a bit confused.

The buildbot output for linux-32-nightly is working and thus should have
output, but the one for linux-32-snapshot is broken.


The snapshot is running on a different box (well, different vm), and I 
think I have something I still need to fix on the new vm.
Nightly is running ubuntu 12.04 and snapshot is on ubuntu 10.04. Thus 
the snapshot should create 'better' install packages ...


A.








On 23.11.2012 13:04, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:


Hi,

as we had changed our 'project name' from OpenOffice.org to Apache
OpenOffice it makes sense to reflect this change also in our source and
the
product based on our source.
We had already made some basic and limited renaming - start center, splash
screen, ... -, but it is not complete.

May be you remember Armin's work on it for our AOO 3.4 (incubating)
release on
branch alg/install. As Armin figured out that the change would be too
risky, we
decided to postpone this name adaption to the next major release.
Thus, I decided to pick up this issue with the goal to solve it for our
next
coming major release.

As there are certain different usages of the name and its variants - e.g.,
visible name of the product, name of the installation directory, ... -
which
impacts quite different areas of our project help is very welcome here.

I will start with investigating Armin's work and documenting the
different usages.

Best regards, Oliver.

Re: Build broken in canvas

[Andrew Rist]

On 1/16/2013 6:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

Thank you Armin;

It will take me some time to check but I think that you hit the issue.

I guess it's time to have a BSD buildbot (hi Andrew ;) ).


YES!





The difference with the linux buildbot is that we try to use all the system
libraries available.

Pedro.





Da: Armin Le Grand armin.le.gr...@me.com
A: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Inviato: Mercoledì 16 Gennaio 2013 5:03
Oggetto: Re: Build broken in canvas

 Hi Pedro,

should be done with rev 1433875 in source/cairo/cairo_devicehelper.cxx, please 
check.

On 16.01.2013 10:41, Armin Le Grand wrote:

Hi Pedro,

looks as if I had cairo disabled when building linux version of that change, 
sorry. I'm on it...


--
ALG

Re: [discussion] Buildbot standard a.o or our own.

[Andrew Rist]

On 1/2/2013 2:25 AM, janI wrote:

Andrea:

thx for your observations.

With the very low activity we have on trunk, there might be no reason for
statistics.

I am simply just used to a more comfortable and flexible build system. If I
want to check my l10n changes on different platforms I have to (or so I
have been told) merge it to trunk and maybe be a pain for all others, an
alternative (which is seen in other build systems) is a possibility to
register a branch for a single night-compile.
If it was a persistent branch or tag, it would be very easy to set up a 
nightly build for it.  (I'd be happy to do that, and we have resources 
available to do it)
Beyond that it gets more difficult.  Our build is pretty complex, and 
each of the platforms takes a bit of tweaking - and still, they can be a 
bit finicky.


The other issue is that we have a pretty long running build - 2 to 12 
hours - and it contains a lot of long running processes.  The problem 
here is that the ci frameworks have a hard time canceling a build, when 
they kill the process, they often leave around multiple child processes, 
some which hang and cause future builds to break. This is a long winded 
description of why the current approach focuses on nightly builds vs. 
triggered builds.


Each of our builds is also pretty resource intensive, and if we are not 
careful, it is pretty easy to cause problems for the projects who we 
share buildbots with.


The above isn't meant to say that things are best as they are, or even 
where we want it to be. This also isn't to suggest there aren't many 
improvements to be made.   I'm just trying to illuminate the hurdles we 
face.


A.



but I will leave that theme to others.
Jan I.

On 1 January 2013 23:07, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:


janI wrote:


I might be wrong but do we e.g.
- get automatic mail when a build fails ?
- have a statistic over our build through time ?


Notifications are sent to openoffice-commits, see for example

http://mail-archives.apache.**org/mod_mbox/openoffice-**
commits/201301.mbox/%**3C20130101075333.41945C00F8@**aegis.apache.org%3Ehttp://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-commits/201301.mbox/%3c20130101075333.41945c0...@aegis.apache.org%3E

I don't know if we have a handy way to see the build history and not just
the latest build status displayed at
http://ci.apache.org/projects/**openoffice/http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/


  I think the job being done today is great, and was in my own (obviously

not
too elegant) way just trying to see if we could improve.


I didn't see anything inappropriate in the requests and reactions about
the buildbot so far... it's normal to ask, it's normal to expect easy
fixes, and it's normal that more challenging changes are accepted or denied
based on discussion with people who are doing that work.

Regards,
   Andrea.

Re: [discussion] Buildbot standard a.o or our own.

[Andrew Rist]

On 12/31/2012 2:09 AM, janI wrote:

Is there a reason why we use our own buildbot and not one of the infra
supported ones, like e.g. Continuum.
We /are/ using the ASF buildbot infrastructure.  So I'm kind of confused 
by the question.

check http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
Also, the decision to go with buildbot, vs maven or something else in 
the ASF ci quiver was due to the complexity of our build.
Add to that the strange gymnastics we have to do on Windows (Herbert 
will attest to the strangeness!!) it is pretty much the only option as I 
see it.


A.


Sharing servers with other and having other people maintain the build
routines should be to our advantage.

Or do I see life in the wrong light ?

rgds
Jan I

Re: old business...old OpenOffice domain names registered by Oracle (primarily)

[Andrew Rist]

On 12/30/2012 5:36 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 02/11/2012 Andrea Pescetti wrote:

Actually these domains are still there: I tested 5 random ones from
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4906 and as Dave wrote they
appear to have been (auto)renewed. They do not resolve, but WHOIS shows
that they still exist and still belong to Oracle.
Which means that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4906 can
progress normally with the transfer of ownership of those domains to the
ASF. I asked on the issue page details on the next steps.


I've seen no developments on this old issue. This is something that 
the project can only marginally control, since it requires a handover 
of the domain names from Oracle to r...@apache.org ; did the 
discussion between Oracle and root even start? Refer to the issue page 
(link above) for more information.
You'll notice the issue is from me.  at the time I created the JIRA I 
had all of the domains released for transfer.  I'm not sure if they are 
still in that state (probably not), but if someone wants to get this 
going again, I will make sure to cover whatever actions need to happen 
on the Oracle side.


A.



Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: dist move...

[Andrew Rist]

On 12/6/2012 9:40 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org wrote:

On 06.12.2012 00:03, Kay Schenk wrote:

I put in a request, as part of our graduation process, to have our
dist area moved to a top level.

INFRA-5607

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5607


The issue is requesting a move to http://www.apache.org/dist/ooo, but
shouldn't this better be named */openoffice (or */aoo)?

Herbert

Herbert -- see comments by Henk on the ticket. It does appear that
/dist/openoffice will be the new top-level name for our *next* release
-- nothing will be moved now. Perhaps this was already communicated to
infra and I was not aware of it.

Also, of more immediate concern is the archiving of the 3.4.0 source
release and possibly the 3.3. patch.

All of this is driven by the nature of /dist/, how it is mirrored 
outside Apache, and the pretty substantial resources taken up by our 
release.
There are consequences to moving something once it is there - some 
mirrors might end up with both areas mirrored, for example.
The best way to resolve that (in the opinion of infra - AIUI) is to move 
the location on our next release, this allows for planing of resources 
and the notification of the mirror network.   It seems a reasonable 
approach to me.


Andrew

Re: svn commit: r839584 - /infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

[Andrew Rist]

Done

$ svn switch http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk

At revision 1414324



also ran a switch on the win7snap build area:

$ svn switch http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT

At revision 1414342




I now see that you did it through an imaginative set of buildbot config 
steps - nice work.
also - at first the revisions above looked identical, while trying to 
figure that out it was just a dyslexia thing on the last two digits...



A.


On 11/27/2012 12:06 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:

Hi Andrew,

On 26.11.2012 20:02, Andrew Rist wrote:

Did you run switch on the svn tree for the windows nightly build? That
seems to be the only piece not updated by this change.
A.
[...]

@@ -36,13 +36,13 @@ c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-nightly',
builderNames=['aoo-win7'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=30))


See the change above, the aoo-win7-nightly was updated to the TLP 
location. The problem is that the win7 buildbot doesn't run a SVN 
step, it does its own thing by doing a svn up in its pristine svn 
checkout. So someone with ssh access into that box needs to switch 
this pristine checkout to the change upstream location.


Herbert

Re: svn commit: r839584 - /infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

[Andrew Rist]

Herbert,
Did you run switch on the svn tree for the windows nightly build? That 
seems to be the only piece not updated by this change.

A.

On 11/26/2012 12:30 AM, h...@apache.org wrote:

Author: hdu
Date: Mon Nov 26 08:30:23 2012
New Revision: 839584

Log:
after graduation openoffice moved from incubator/ooo

Modified:
 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

Modified: 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf
==
--- 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf 
(original)
+++ 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf 
Mon Nov 26 08:30:23 2012
@@ -3,32 +3,32 @@
  # schedulers
  
  c['schedulers'].append(AnyBranchScheduler(name=on-openofficeorg-commit,

- branches=[incubator/ooo/site],
+ branches=[openoffice/site],
   treeStableTimer=2,
   builderNames=[openofficeorg-site-staging]))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux64-nightly',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux64-nightly'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=10))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux64-rat',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux64-rat'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=3,
minute=10))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux32-nightly',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux32-nightly'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=20))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-weekly',

builderNames=['aoo-win7'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
properties={'rsync_opts':'--delete'},
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=6,
@@ -36,13 +36,13 @@ c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-nightly',

builderNames=['aoo-win7'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=30))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-snapshot',

builderNames=['aoo-w7snap'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=2,
minute=30))
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ c['status'].append(mail.MailNotifier(fro
  # schedulers
  
  c['schedulers'].append(AnyBranchScheduler(name=on-ooo-site-commit,

- branches=[incubator/ooo/ooo-site],
+ branches=[openoffice/ooo-site],
   treeStableTimer=2,
   builderNames=[ooo-site-site-staging]))
  
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ f_ooo_1 = factory.BuildFactory()

  f_ooo_1.addStep(SVN(
  mode=copy,
  baseURL=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/;,
-defaultBranch=incubator/ooo/trunk,
+defaultBranch=openoffice/trunk,
  ))
  
  f_ooo_1.addStep(SetProperty(command=date +%Y-%m-%d_%H:%M:%S, property=today))

@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ f_ooo_1r = factory.BuildFactory()
  f_ooo_1r.addStep(SVN(
  mode=copy,
  baseURL=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/;,
-defaultBranch=incubator/ooo/trunk,
+defaultBranch=openoffice/trunk,
  ))
  
  # RAT reporting. An xml config file on the slave points the rat jar to main/rat-excludes as part of its run.

@@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ c['builders'].append(b_ooo_w1)
  f_ooo_w2 = factory.BuildFactory()
  
  # svn under cygwin - as required by windows build

-# f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn co 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/tags/SNAPSHOT build_svn'],
+# f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn co 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT build_svn'],
  f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn up build_svn'],
  haltOnFailure=True, workdir=build,
  description=[updating,reference source], 
descriptionDone=[updated,reference source],
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ f_ooo_3 = factory.BuildFactory()
  f_ooo_3.addStep(SVN(
  mode=copy,
  baseURL=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/;,
-defaultBranch=incubator/ooo/trunk,
+defaultBranch=openoffice/trunk,
  ))
  
  f_ooo_3.addStep(SetProperty(command=date +%Y-%m-%d_%H:%M:%S, property=today))




--

Andrew Rist | Interoperability

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/23/2012 8:14 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:00:54 +0100
jan iversen j...@apache.org wrote:


Good idea, that was basically what I meant...however even microsoft, does
provide a slim setup, that then downloads the needed packages.

There is a disadvantage to that: such an installation has to have on-line 
access at install time.  There are still many users who do not have on-line 
access 24/7 at broadband speeds; they may rely for installation on a download 
on a public library machine or a friend's machine and transfer the file to the 
target computer by USB key, so a complete package (whether compiled for natice 
language or as outlined above) would be useful to them,
This point comes up over and over again.  We need to serve both groups, 
but the solution should not force either group into a degraded install 
process.


We can have a 'slim setup' that then loads resources from the same 
location/media it came from.
This approach works for those who need local media due to bandwidth 
constraints  (CD/USB Key/File system)
It also works efficiently for broadband loading the bootstrap ('slim 
setup') over the network, and then collecting additional resources as 
needed.


If it is built correctly, this type of install would also facilitate 
1-click installs without requiring the duplication of bits which is a 
growing problem as we again add languages.   If the bootstrap setup is 
loaded with a configuration file, it could be set to load specific 
language packs, dictionaries, and additional extensions. (The additional 
files would either be downloaded over the network from the same network 
location, or bundled on the same media in the same folder for a CD/USB 
type install)


Let's stop arguing over which of the two scenarios our install will 
support correctly, and agree that we need to support both scenarios 
correctly.



Andrew




snip

Re: development locations...again

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/19/2012 3:28 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
Re this discussion initiated by Marcus on Nov 9 (I know longer have 
the original):


http://markmail.org/message/fz7mkldympxwrnvn

Whole looking around for our current buildbot output, I did find 
successful builds for Linux and Win linked on this page:


http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/

No Mac however. 
We're waiting for access to the Mac buildbot.  The buildbot software has 
only recently been loaded on the current box - the older Mac slave 
turned out to be 'all dead'.
Our build is a bit of a hog, and requires a bunch of prerequisites, so 
we have to be careful about not breaking the other projects on the box.

That said, we do want a  Mac bot and it is an open issue.
At any rate, I just thought I might put this out there for 
consideration for development versions.


However, on the above page, languages other than en only provided 
for Windows(?)

huhhh?  Pretty sure full language set is built on L32 and L64.
We are looking to down rev the Linux32 bot to Ubuntu 10.10 do that the 
install bits are linked against the right symbols, etc.


And, part 2, should we be testing these?
sounds great.  Actually, this was discussed during ApacheCon, and it is 
another of our long standing goals.

Re: development locations...again

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/19/2012 4:13 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:


On 11/19/2012 3:28 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
Re this discussion initiated by Marcus on Nov 9 (I know longer have 
the original):


http://markmail.org/message/fz7mkldympxwrnvn

Whole looking around for our current buildbot output, I did find 
successful builds for Linux and Win linked on this page:


http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/

No Mac however. 
We're waiting for access to the Mac buildbot.  The buildbot software 
has only recently been loaded on the current box - the older Mac slave 
turned out to be 'all dead'.
Our build is a bit of a hog, and requires a bunch of prerequisites, so 
we have to be careful about not breaking the other projects on the box.

That said, we do want a  Mac bot and it is an open issue.
At any rate, I just thought I might put this out there for 
consideration for development versions.


However, on the above page, languages other than en only provided 
for Windows(?)

huhhh?  Pretty sure full language set is built on L32 and L64.
oh - en-US only.  This is something to discuss - though not sure of the 
value of all languages on all platforms nightly.  Perhaps we do all 
languages for all platforms for just the SNAPSHOT builds.
We are looking to down rev the Linux32 bot to Ubuntu 10.10 do that the 
install bits are linked against the right symbols, etc.


And, part 2, should we be testing these?
sounds great.  Actually, this was discussed during ApacheCon, and it 
is another of our long standing goals.

Re: Request to provide windows install-arc zip download on buildbot.

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/16/2012 12:18 AM, Zhe Liu wrote:

Hi,
Who can help to make buildbot to provide windows install-arc zip download?
I can't find the package in the links.
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/win/
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/winsnap/
  It's very useful for automated test. Just one command to copy the zip
from instsetoo_native/wntmsci12.pro/OpenOffice/archive/install/ to
the download site.
  Thanks.
I am happy to make changes to the configuration step.  What is the 
specific change needs to be made to the config command?
(this is a question for the larger community  anyone who knows 
please chime in.)
I know on Linux we use the --with-package-format=installed rpm deb to 
set the packaging - what is the correct version on Windows?

Also, for the automated testing:

 * are you using nightly or the snapshots build?
 * what languages are you interested in?
 * how can we hook up the testing to the buildbots and run it as part
   of the nightly??

A.

[BUILD] New gmake branch

[Andrew Rist]

Andre,

I have updated the gmake branch (branches/gbuild) and changed all the 
headers.  A couple of quick fixes are added.
At this point the branch is trunk + CWS patches.   make -di takes me 
pretty far in, but I get:

GNUmakefile:35: *** Corrupted module targetstack! . Stop

also, there is a warning due to a hack in 
main/svx/AllLangResTarget_svx.mk (~108/135)


Can you see if you can nudge this forward?  Also, please teach us all to 
fish, so explain any fixes you make.


Thanks,
A.

Re: Look at the pretty branches

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/14/2012 3:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

I see that our project is growing new branches.   Would it make sense
to start documenting these on a wiki page, so it is clear what each
one is, and who is maintaining it?

Current branches are:

AOO34/ --- Our 3.4.x branch, would be used if we ever need a 3.4.2

alg/ -- This is Armin's long-term graphics rendering improvement work,
maybe integrated for AOO 4.1

gbuild/ -- This looks new, from Andrew.  Sounds build-related.  But
what is it?  And what is the plan for getting it integrated?  Is this
planned AOO 4.0?

This is a continuation of this:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201209.mbox/%3c505a1dc4.5030...@oracle.com%3E

integration of a set of CWSes:
ause131
ause130
writerfilter10
gnumake4
sd2gbuild

The initial branch for doing this work was deleted and this new branch 
created.  With the original branch, I had applied all of the patches en 
masse, followed by one massive check-in.  We'll just say that this was 
sub-optimal.  After discussions at ApacheConEU - it was decided the best 
course was to start from scratch, that way we don't have to merge up to 
the latest trunk.  I'm in the process now of applying and committing all 
the patches, followed by changing all the headers in newly created files.



fun


A.


writer001/ -- Ditto.  What is it and what is the plan for getting it integrated?

Thanks!

-Rob

Re: Apache OpenOffice at FOSDEM 2013

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/13/2012 5:49 AM, RA Stehmann wrote:

Am 13.11.2012 03:01, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:

{forgive top posting}

First off, thanks for leading the charge at FOSDEM. On this side of the
Atlantic we need to gear up on ACNA and figure out what we want to do, and
who will be available. (excuses here, for a small delay)

Let's get the devroom right as a priority. IMHO. Points 2 and 3 would be
nice, but let's really nail the devroom, and everything else will take care
of itself, so to speak (and I do not know how that translates, sorry!)

So let's be laser focused on the 'series of talks' we want to ask our
community to step up and do. We can promote this CFP via our banner on
openoffice.org.


The openoffice.org banner would be totally wasted for that, reaching
750K people a day, 99.999% of them being users and not at all
interested in this conference. I'd recommend a blog post as an
intermediate approach.

I'll be commandeering the openoffice.org banner for the near future to
attract new volunteers, something we've so far failed to do by giving
each other presentations at conferences.

-Rob



I don't agree.

I makes IMO sense to promote our aktivities at FOSDEM on our website.
Maybe some friends of OpenOffice will see it and will go to FOSDEM
because of the program in the dev-room or to meet our people at the booth.

If only one of them becomes a submitter or supports us in another way
later effort has payed off.

FOSDEM is definitely no event to reach new users of an office suite but
one to recruit new volunteers.

+1

It may make sense to have a high profile message of Developers, come 
see us at FOSDEM
We only need a very low conversion rate to make a substantial difference 
to the project,
and it also emphasizes to the end users showing up at the page that we 
are a project made
up of volunteers, that is always welcoming of more interested people 
willing to help.


A.


Regards
Michael