Hi, > > > > Ok honestly I am not sure what is the big issue. 3.1 was also > > released > under Pavel builds (#101415) and nobody really issue any flags. So > 'switching' arrgument doesn't really apply here.
that's the point: you either release it under Pavel's builds or under the vanilla one. Pavel's builds are also fine, but they're not the same and you need to be consistent. > > I also don't see the bigger issue whenever we used pavel's build or > vanilla. Most of the previous QA requirements was only about > providing an MD5 which we did for at least the mylinuxclasses.com > windows build (since pavel don't provide them anymore). You don't see an issue with having people downloading the official OOo version (at least that's what they think they're doing) from "mylinuxclasses.com"? > > Most of the locale builds are also done in Pootle so there is really > no fork or duplicate of efforts here, except maybe for a second build > which didn't apply any updates to begin with. That IS be the problem. And the second build as you call it, which is OOo's build, set the resolution of the bugfix to the 3.2.1. > Ihi decision to wait > until 3.2.1 as opposed to apply them right for RC5 would have been > the best answer here. But we work too much too quickly to end up with > no build for 3.2.0. > look, you can't have everything for free all the time. Sometimes things do not work exactly the way you want. In this case, I think you were too late in proposing a fix or even alerting the release team about the problem. It was at RC 5 level, not at beta stage. Don't expect miracles at that moment if you haven't done the least before. Charles. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@native-lang.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@native-lang.openoffice.org
