Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-06 Thread Andrea Pescetti
Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Phillip Rhodes wrote: 1. What is the main problem with the build system as it is? It's ugly. I recall you once built OpenOffice, right? It is not the easy configure + make. Still, it works and the build system is not

Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-06 Thread Phillip Rhodes
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Phillip Rhodes wrote: > >> >> 1. What is the main problem with the build system as it is? >> > > It's ugly. I recall you once built OpenOffice, right? It is not the easy > configure + make. Still, it works and the

Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: > > 3. Regarding Mac in particular, I'll repeat this question from an earlier > thread: Does the ASF have Mac hardware for doing Mac builds, or are we > dependent solely on developer machines for that? > Is there

Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-02 Thread Damjan Jovanovic
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: > Forgive my level of ignorance here, but I haven't been a very active > participant to this point, so there's a lot I don't know. > > In a lot of the discussion around this whole "retirement" thing (both on > the

Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-02 Thread Phillip Rhodes
I was actually (mostly) joking about the OS/2 thing. Not that I wasn't a raving OS/2 fan up until about 2000. But for AOO, I think the answers to the other five questions are more important at the moment. Does anybody have any commentary on those topics? Thanks, Phil This message

Re: The AOO build system

2016-09-02 Thread Marcus
Am 09/02/2016 09:24 PM, schrieb Fernando Cassia: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: 6. Do we still build for OS/2? :-) (Sorry, I'm sentimental old fool). please have a look here [1] and here [2] for newer OS/2 builds that are indeed not part of