> On Mar 7, 2019, at 8:14 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > Am 07.03.19 um 17:02 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Hi - >> >>> On Mar 7, 2019, at 6:31 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>> >>> ++1 >>> >>>> On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Jim and all, >>>> >>>> As mentioned before, I think we need some more time before doing a >>>> (public) beta. >>>> But I also want to get a wider user base for testing and something >>>> "official" we can base our discussions on. >>>> >>>> So here is my proposal: >>>> >>>> We could create a tag (snapshot420 or whatever) and build it as a >>>> developer snapshot. >>>> This can be done similar to a beta with the build targets: >>>> openofficedev, ooodevlanguagepack and sdkoodev. >>>> >>>> We also have a special splashscreen for a "Developer Snapshot": >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO42X/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/intro.png >>>> >>>> I would like to have all recent translations committed and merged before >>>> we create the tag. >>>> March would be a good time, so we could also include the updated English >>>> dictionary. >>>> >>>> The build should be uploaded to an official place together with all >>>> hashes and PGP signatures. >>>> It could be announced with a blog post linked on our homepage. >>>> >>>> Opinions? >> Would we limit the distribution as follows? >> We would not distribute to SourceForge. >> We would not put this on the OpenOffice.org download page. >> We would put the distribution on our official Apache Dist page, but not >> allow the Apache Mirrors to pick it up (as now, but make sure with Infra >> first) >> We would only note the distribution from the blog post and emails to all of >> our openoffice.apache.org <http://openoffice.apache.org/> mailing lists. >> We would allow the Forums to POST where it is available if it is a way to >> solve user issues. >> >> (I think we need to warn Infra in case too many are taking this version from >> www.apache.org/dist/ <http://www.apache.org/dist/>.) > > Speaking for a Developer Snapshot: > Yes to all, but I would prefer to put the binaries to > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/ > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/>
Got it. Then we really don’t even need to VOTE. Regards, Dave > > Regards, > > Matthias > > >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Matthias >>>> >>>> Am 18.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>> Release, as in GA, or release as in Beta? >>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 15, 2019, at 4:55 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug 125129 looks like a wild goose chase and requires considerable >>>>>> understanding of the framework layer, but I'll try continue when I have >>>>>> time. >>>>>> >>>>>> My own release checklist would include: >>>>>> 1. Library audit. >>>>>> 1.1 Did we lose or gain any public symbols in our libraries since the >>>>>> 4.1.0? Gbuild requires explicit export instead of exporting everything >>>>>> and >>>>>> then possibly controlling visibility with a .map file, so it's very >>>>>> possible. >>>>>> 1.2 Did ELF symbol versions on *nix platforms change? The older gbuild >>>>>> modules probably did, as I didn't understand the meaning of .map files >>>>>> back >>>>>> then. >>>>>> 1.3 Are the same libraries with the same names available in both 4.1.0 >>>>>> and >>>>>> 4.2.0? >>>>>> 2. Base: >>>>>> 2.1 Complete the Java SDBC driver framework, used by both the new >>>>>> SDBC-JDBC >>>>>> bridge and the Postgres SDBC driver. >>>>>> 2.2 Audit the new SDBC-JDBC bridge in Java against the old C++ one, fix >>>>>> any >>>>>> differences. >>>>>> 2.3 Complete the Postgres SDBC driver; still needs views, users, groups, >>>>>> etc. >>>>>> 2.4 Complete the integration of the Postgres SDBC driver into the Base UI >>>>>> forms (like MySQL already is). >>>>>> 3. Crashreporter >>>>>> 3.1 Get it working again. >>>>>> 3.2 Bug reported in UI form (instead of submitted to some now obsolete >>>>>> server), which can be copied/pasted or attached to Bugzilla. >>>>>> 4. Testing >>>>>> 4.1 Run all available tests (unit tests, smoketest, module integration >>>>>> tests, bvt, fvt, etc.) against 4.1.0 and 4.2.0, find and fix any >>>>>> regressions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Damjan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:25 AM Matthias Seidel >>>>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO, the situation hasn't changed so much. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We should at least fix issue 125129 [1] before we release a (public) >>>>>>> beta. I have seen that Damjan is investigating... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then we need time to inform translators on l10n@ before we can export >>>>>>> the latest translations from Pootle. >>>>>>> At the moment most of them are at 98% for the UI but the SDF files still >>>>>>> need to be updated in source. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Matthias >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125129 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 14.02.19 um 17:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>>>> Time for another ping... what does everyone think? Time? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> 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 >>> >> >
