Hi Marcus and JBF, I'd like to ask Marcus and Jean-Baptiste about filing issue about PPC Mac 3.2.0 release process. Something like following. http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109277 it is not too late. better than nothing. I can do it but it is not appropreate I'm just a build provider. I belive recording is very important. I also add some comments about your ML thread. It is very informative.
From: Marcus Lange <marcus.la...@sun.com> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Testing 3.2.0 en-US on MacOS X PPC Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:53:45 +0100 >> I see. Thanks, in any case I recommend filing issue. Otherwise >> we cannot keep track what happens, even though it is *NOT* actually >> trigger the real processes. > > you are right. I promise to do it better next time. ;-( I belive it is not too late...I'm not sure we will have a release version for 3.2.1...We only have a record in this ML or my blog entry. It won't be an official one. >> So - Marcus, what is your opinion for approval issues? Is it relevant? >> Is it redundant? > > They are is still needed. I see. > AFAIK the items in QATrack are used to keep an overview about the > current status of every listed build. But "approved" status does't > mean it will be published on mirrors (more or less) > automatically. "automatically" is the key point. If we can automatically feed approval into issue list or something like that, we can reduce some efforts. > Maybe the NL team would like to release all possible > builds at the same time due to a press announcement and therefore has > to wait until all are approved? Yes - this is the case of JA team, too. > Furthermore, I cannot look every 5 min. into QATrack just to see that > a another build was approved that should now be released to the > mirrors. ;-) I see. > Therefore a separate issue is still necessary to tell which builds > should now be really released to the mirrors. > > Also, with a query in Issuezilla you can get an overview which builds > (or better languages) are really released. > >> cf. http://blog.livedoor.jp/maho_nakata/archives/51348609.html >> In my opinion, keeping two identical info are problematic. > > With the thoughts from above I don't see it as identical. At least for > me there is a clear difference. ok, thanks Best regards, Nakata Maho > >> From: Marcus Lange <marcus.la...@sun.com> >> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Testing 3.2.0 en-US on MacOS X PPC >> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:28:59 +0100 >> >>> Hi Maho, >>> >>> I wrote no specific issue for this. But the distribution is tracked in >>> QATrack. >>> >>> Ciao >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >>> Maho NAKATA wrote: >>>> Hi Marcus, and Jean-Baptiste >>>> thank you very much, I'm very appreciated! >>>> Anyway which issue is related to this release process? >>>> Thanks again! >>>> From: Marcus Lange <marcus.la...@sun.com> >>>> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Testing 3.2.0 en-US on MacOS X PPC >>>> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:00:18 +0100 >>>> >>>>> Hi Maho, >>>>> >>>>> yes, in my previous post of course I mean "now available". ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> Marcus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maho NAKATA wrote: >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> I guess you mean >>>>>> http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/MacOSX/3.2.0rc5_20100202/OOo_3.2.0rc5_20100202_MacOSXPowerPC_install.dmg >>>>>> ? >>>>>> From: Marcus Lange <marcus.la...@sun.com> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Testing 3.2.0 en-US on MacOS X PPC >>>>>> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:42:37 +0100 >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the build is no available for download on the websites. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maho NAKATA wrote: >>>>>>>> Hello Jean-Baptiste >>>>>>>> many thanks as PowerPC package provider. how you will have >>>>>>>> done should be formalized so that others can take over. >>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>> From: Jean-Baptiste Faure <jbf.fa...@laposte.net> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Testing 3.2.0 en-US on MacOS X PPC >>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:37:05 +0100 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le 10.03.2010 09:43, Marcus Lange a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Le 09.03.2010 23:07, Marcus Lange a écrit : >>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Jean-Baptiste, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, I have added a second tests scenario for MacOS PPC to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> papayes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in FR >>>>>>>>>>>>>> category. He will read test description in French and do the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> en_US version. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Tests (Release Sanity scenario) done (assignment ID : 8385). One >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fail >>>>>>>>>>>>> found as in FR version, on test 109172. >>>>>>>>>>>> so, in other words the test was successful and the build is >>>>>>>>>>>> approved? >>>>>>>>>>> If it was FR build I would want a second test to confirm. But if >>>>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>> not have a second tester I think you can consider that other >>>>>>>>>>> approved >>>>>>>>>>> PPC builds help to approve this one. >>>>>>>>>> then I think a single test must be enough. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So, thanks a lot for your help and of course to the tester. :-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best regards >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You're welcome :-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> JBF > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qa.openoffice.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qa.openoffice.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qa.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qa.openoffice.org
