ericb wrote:
Hi,
Hum... I was waiting for *constructive* remarks
First, OpenOffice.org is the only CVS I'll use, with IZ. I dont
recognize good day *as long as it is not officialy* part of
OpenOffice.org project. Important project changes are voted, and one
alone people can _not_ change the project. OpenOffice.org is a
community project.
Eric, I agree. And with a community project information is exchanged.
Something like this:
I just finished a successful build of SRC680_m119 on MacOSX 10.4.2, with
gcc 3.3 from XCode 2.0, Java 1.3.1 with the following patches, IZXXXX,
IZYYYYY, and IZZZZZ. If you want to test this build, it is located at
ftp://openoffice.org/myfilespace/OO1.9_m119.for.OSX.tiger.only.tar.gz
or wherever the build file is located, for testing and comment. I
noticed that Eric H and you both put up finished products, but Maho
actually puts up what he did to get a successful build (it is in his
build-oo.pl files.) This allows others to duplicate his efforts and to
comment on whether or not a particular patch file works.
Second, If you find #42998 is open since too much time, up to you to
sign JCA and feel free to complete ! For me they're more important
fixes to find before to fix this issue, but asap, I'll continue for
#i42998#. (FYI, I'm actually working on a last minute change from
Tino for macosx10). Not in cvs, of course :-) )
Ok, here's the story, Jerry. I, because of an agreement between my
employer and myself which may have been cancelled, LEGALLY CANNOT SIGN
THE JCA AT THIS TIME. Thus, I am prohibited by US and International law
from directly contributing to Sun any code that I generate until this
agreement is terminated. However, I have contacted my company's legal
team as this agreement was withdrawn after I signed it, due to a problem
with the agreement which I think voided the agreement in whole as I work
on OOo when I'm off duty and it has nothing to do with what we provide
to our customers. If it is determined that I can sign the JCA, I will.
Third, I strongly invite you to *not* include experimental patches
(often wrong) in downloadable builds. Experimental means not
commited because we're not completely sure they work. When you can
checkout changes, they are sure most of the time. If you introduce
serious problem in distributed builds, this is a bad thing for the
project, and the last patches I have seen at "good day " are not a
good idea, I just send them Maho because he often does advanced
builds, and is able to confirm changes are ok (just a QA action).
How do you define experimental? If it is a patch that has been verified
as 'FIXED' but is not in the master code, then is that experimental? If
it is a patche that is in any of the macosx?? cws's, is it considered
experimental? Also, I have not put any code out for download.
Fourth, FYI, I do builds on both Linux Intel, Linux PowerPC and Mac
OSX to verify my changes are ok. When a Windows test is needed, I
simply ask here, on on IRC.
Ok. As I stated, I don't have a Linux Intel system to build on. I
might decide to fire up OS/2 someday and I think I have enough to build
on as I think I still have the disks to put on a compiler that is valid
for OOo. In any case, at the present time I am working on OOo and NeoJ
which is enough work for my system and myself.
James McKenzie
I prefer stop here, and I propose to continue *after* you sign JCA.
Regards,
eric bachard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
