On 3/31/14 10:37 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > On 3/29/14 5:29 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 6:44 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 27/03/2014 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 3/27/14 1:59 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there interest for a "live" (meaning: IRC + video, like Google >>>>>> Hangouts or similar) meeting to make sure that we (developers, QA, >>>>>> Localization, Documentation, website...) are all on the same page >>>>>> regarding the upcoming 4.1 release? >>>>> >>>>> we can try such a meeting but I don't see the benefit compared to a >>>>> clear communication on the mailing list (can be of course improved). >>>> >>>> >>>> The benefit would be: make sure that active volunteers have a chance to be >>>> heard and to influence the release. We are doing good now; still, we can do >>>> better. See below for concrete examples. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Either we do it in a more organized way and define exactly what we >>>>> expect or I am not interested. >>>> >>>> >>>> I am not interested in the other option. Well, maybe I misunderstood what >>>> you mean by "organized", but for sure I would find it overkill that we have >>>> to vote for someone to be in a call to represent a certain group (say, QA) >>>> and vote on what the call topics should be. It's an informal meeting. >>>> >>>>>> It wouldn't be a meeting where things are decided (we have the lists for >>>>>> that!), but merely a meeting where people can inform each other to make >>>>>> sure that all priorities are being addressed ... >>>>> >>>>> I am in favor of having such discussion mainly on the list to have it >>>>> documented. >>>> >>>> >>>> Note that it's more about being informed (about stuff that is already >>>> somewhere on the lists), and discussion can follow on lists. >>>> >>>> Maybe it helps if I make a concrete past example: the "Restore windows" >>>> problem https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119006 has been known >>>> for two years. It only triggered on certain versions of Mac OS X and only >>>> after a crash. Still it caused 500+ e-mails, and probably countless forum >>>> posts and some enraged/lost users. In retrospect, we should have evaluated >>>> it better. >>>> >>>> How can we avoid the next "Restore windows", i.e., something that is known, >>>> important to someone, already documented somewhere but that would deserve >>>> better attention? It's important for OpenOffice as a project that active >>>> volunteers feel that they can influence the release. And it is also very >>>> good for OpenOffice as a product. >>>> >>>> Now, the obvious answer is "Just place it in Bugzilla and nominate it as a >>>> release blocker". This doesn't always work. For a release blocker, for >>>> example, you would require in most cases that a patch is available, and a >>>> description that is purely technical can miss to state why it is important >>>> to get it fixed before release. And if you look at who is nominating >>>> blockers, you'll see that only a few people do that. >>>> >>>> The IRC+video meeting is the best solution I can find, but anything else >>>> that guarantees proper escalation would work for me. Just, asking people to >>>> simply follow the process is too demanding on volunteers and we need to >>>> streamline it (another concrete example? we don't have 4.0 in Danish mainly >>>> due to bad communication, since translation was completed before the 4.0 >>>> release but after the deadlines). >>>> >>>> If you want yet another example... we already know that OpenOffice 4.1 is >>>> going to have display problems for Gnome 3 users on Linux. Two bugs have >>>> clearly been identified: no refresh on fields >>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124482 and no scrollbars >>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121627 ; the former has a >>>> working patch by Andre and I'll nominate it as a blocker, but what about >>>> the >>>> latter? Does it make sense to nominate it even if we don't have a fix >>>> available? Will a meeting where active people can report on what they see >>>> on >>>> the forums, lists etc help in making the assessment? >>> >>> We can always have a Hangout on our Google+ page. But I think that is >>> limited to 10 people and ties us to a specific time, making it more or >>> less convenient to people depending on their timezone. So I'm not >>> sure it is much more inclusive. >>> >>> But you could make the argument that it is a best practice with Agile >>> methodology for us to have "daily scrum" meeting to check in and >>> review blockers. But that could also be done via the mailing list, >>> with a new thread each day, e.g., "2014-03-29 Daily Scrum". >> >> As I read the other emails I was thinking that a bug scrub would be good. >> This would allow a group to discuss bugs and issues. The goal would be a >> priority list which could then be shared on list, debated. We can then >> commit ( agile term). Daily scrum then tracks the progress towards the goal. >> The scrum master records the info. Scrum master can change from day to day. >> It is clerical. >> > > we can stop discussion on such scrum or whatever meetings as long as we > don't have more developers. > > Take a look on the issues that came in over the weekend, 124553 a crash > on Linux when you select a table and some text below or before. I am > really asking if anybody has used the Beta version on Linux and used > form some simple tasks? And taking this issue as example should we > really accept Linux issues as showstopper? > > Ok don't take me to serious but I hope you see my point. We have a > problem but that can't be solved with such meetings. > > @andrea, my point is that I am not interested in an informal meeting > without a special outcome. Issues of broader interest get attention if > they are communicated on the list and we have no timezone issues. > > But we don't need a Beta in the future if such issues as above are not > found over month. > > Nevertheless will be a new snapshot available later today (hopefully if > the upload of the windows builds is fast enough).
I dropped the upload and removed all builds for Linux and Mac as well. We will fix some serious issues an dI hope we can hold the Wednesday schedule Juergen > > Juergen > > > >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> >>> In any case, if a PMC member wants to take the lead on a hangout, and >>> does not already have access to our Google+ page, let me know and I >>> can give you manager access. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> >>>> 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 >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
