Please stop calling 4.1.9 a patch. It is a release which has fixes including the one for the BigSur issue. We are following the same process we did for 4.1.8 which was released less than two months ago. That release took about a month to work through all issues in the RCs.
This community effort to do a release shortly after the prior is an impressive accomplishment for the project. Consider that we have released about a year or two apart the last several years. The proposed language for the blog post exists on the cwiki. Have you looked at it? Simon had a good idea for SEO to include the error message text. We should add that. I think that there is consensus to publish the blog post by Monday. After that it will be time to start preparing 4.1.9 release notes. Have you informed your users about Jim’s test build? Testing sooner allows releasing sooner. Regards, Dave PS. There have been lots of emails ... let’s slow that and ALL be constructive. PPS. Most all of us are volunteers. Let’s keep things fun and positive. Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 31, 2020, at 10:54 AM, Jörg Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2020 3:19 PM >> To: dev >> Subject: Re: My last advance notice regarding Big Sur (was: >> What we should do now) >> >> >> >>> On Dec 31, 2020, at 5:06 AM, Jörg Schmidt >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Although it was clear to everyone here that the issue needs >> a quick solution, and although there were many discussion >> posts and a lot of hard work in revising the blogpost, >> nothing relevant has happened yet. >> >> Are you crazy? Did you not see that I tracked down the cause, >> and that we have a set of 4.1.9 Developer test builds >> available for people to down and test? But instead of >> acknowledging the amount of work done fixing the *root >> cause*, during what many consider a holiday break, you are >> instead bitching and moaning about not getting a blog out as >> per *your* schedule. > > No, I am not crazy. And I had, here in the concrete,. expressly appreciative > words for the work done expressed. (what I do not always) > > At the same time it is not so that you and those who are of your opinion, > automatically right, because there are now once 2 possibilities: > > either: > -we quickly publish an information for the users and work in parallel to fix > the bug > > or: > -we focus only on one patch (and inform only when we release the final patch) > > (I'm talking about "patch", but if there will be a 4.1.9, I mean this one) > > > The "either" was, here in concrete, not automatically controversial, because > e.g. Peter recognized the importance of an information and reacted very fast > by writing a draft. > > Why are you trying to tell me that you are right (because you prioritize the > patch) and I am wrong (because I prioritize the information for the users), > _when in fact we only have different opinions about what has more priority_? > >> "Nothing relevant"? > > Sorry if this is unclear, I meant of course that the users are confronted > with the faulty function of AOO without having any information, so also no > information that tells them that we have long been working on the elimination > of the error. > > Exactly this information to give publicly as soon as possible, I would have > found important. > >> Please do not resort to threats, especially when they are >> based on false reality. > > I didn't threaten anyone, I announced something I didn't even have to > announce, because there is no rule that forbids me as a committer to make > changes in the wiki. > > Let me also argue clearly at this point: I am always ready to accept > criticism when I break rules, but other opinions are not rules, they are just > opinions. > By the way: anyone could have disagreed with me in the thread I clearly > marked "Consensus Building" (that would have been in accordance with the > rules) but no one did. > > > > Jörg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
