First build is available here [1] :) [1] https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/OpenMeetings/job/Openmeetings%203.2.x/
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree, will create new branch > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Maxim, >> >> I would prefer option 2. >> >> It will be a bit more effort, but I think there are more advantages. >> >> 1. >> >> 3.1.x will be clear and it need to be like that, if we talk about >> critical issues that might be discovered somehow. >> >> 2. >> >> We also need to take code-signing in account. I suggest to release a new >> version as soon as it is possible to sign the code again. And there is no >> forecast when it is possible. >> >> >> >> And over all, I have no idea how long it takes, to rebuild the rooms. >> Probably we get a few ideas from the community what could be implemented >> and how. Maybe it is a good idea to ask in the user-list for ideas and >> requests, with the goal that this work need to be done just one time... >> >> >> Greetings Peter >> >> >> Am 14.04.2016 um 08:07 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >> >>> I would like to continue discussion and get your opinion on how "HTML5 >>> features" should be added to the room. >>> >>> I see 3 options >>> 1) development is performed in 3.1.x branch >>> Pros: >>> >>> - we don't need to maintain additional branch >>> - dev versions to test can be taken from usual location >>> - we will "burn the bridge" and next release will contain updated >>> room >>> >>> Cons: >>> >>> - 3.1.x will be unusable for some period of time >>> - some well tested features might be broken during merge >>> >>> >>> 2) additional 3.2.x branch is created >>> Pros: >>> >>> - 3.1.x branch will stay clear and we can release some patch versions >>> >>> Cons: >>> >>> - we have to maintain 3 branches >>> >>> >>> 3) development is performed in trunk >>> Pros: >>> >>> - no new branches >>> >>> Cons: >>> >>> - "OpenLaszlo free" branch is no more "OpenLaszlo free" :( >>> >>> >>> I personally prefer option 1) above, but option 2) might also be OK due >>> to >>> our last 2 releases were not properly signed and we might need to release >>> 3.1.2 without new room .... >>> >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> ok.. I will try to get a few people here to help me... ;-) >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 12.04.2016 um 07:26 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >>>> >>>> Thanks for the response Peter :) >>>>> will start adding HTML5 features to the room :) >>>>> will send requests for testing :) >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Maxim, >>>>> >>>>>> no help with the list from my site.. It is working I think ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> 2nd part.. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wouldn't say ugly... it is more like "no surprises"... Like using >>>>>> java-applications... you know the colors, button style etc... and more >>>>>> html5 would be one more step to get ride of flash... I would >>>>>> appreciate >>>>>> that... >>>>>> >>>>>> Greetings Peter >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 07.04.2016 um 20:11 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>> >>>>>>> I currently using this list [1] as the list of features for 3.1.2, >>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> is not perfect and you know how to make it better? :))) >>>>>>> Additionally today I heard "OM room is ugly" :( I can add more HTML5 >>>>>>> elements to the room (WebSockets semms to work as expected) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENMEETINGS-853?jql=project%20%3D%20OPENMEETINGS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.1.2%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
