On 02.08.2012 13:36, Rob Weir wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Andre Fischer <[email protected]> wrote:
On 01.08.2012 14:56, Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Joe,
On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote:
Please be sure to decouple the source builds
from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org.
I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0
did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides
complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree.
Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for
copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I
am
doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is
not the right place for such a change.
The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no
redirection like there is with the website.
So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/
we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something
like that.
So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find
that their script breaks.
Not necessarily. There are simple technical solutions for this problem:
- Copy, don't move, at least the ext_sources/ tree of the repository. The
incubator copy can be deleted on our next release.
- Use an SVN link to keep the old incubator URL for ext_sources/ alive until
the next release.
- Wait with the transition of the repository until the next release.
I don't see how this solves the Infrastructure policy issue. If I
understand it correctly, it is not merely about where in SVN we store
these dependencies. The issue is that we have our build script hitting
SVN at all. Joe could confirm that.
I just wanted to point out that if we find a political consensus then we
also have a technical solution for the problem.
Besides, I don´t think that the downloading of the tarballs by the build
script is a big problem. Most tarballs are checked out together with
the rest of the source code from SVN. The build script basically makes
sure that none of the tarballs has been deleted in the meantime.
The exception, of course, are builds from the source release, that does
not contain any tarballs. But with the few downloads of the source
release I can not see a problem here either.
Last, but not least, bug 120425 is already fixed. All tarballs of the
branch and most of trunk are now downloaded
- from their original download servers (where I have found them)
- first fallback is apache-exrtras
- second fallback (will be removed shortly) is the SVN repository.
-Andre
What if we bundled the cat-a dependencies in the source tarball?
Would that work? Same net downloads, but the bandwidth then comes
from the mirror network.
Independently from this problem, it might be a good idea to have a
transition phase after graduation during which both URLs are valid.
-Andre
-Rob
Andre
[1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425
Thanks.
________________________________
From: Rob Weir <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1
(incubating)
I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and
verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5.
It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at,
so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.
Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to
review that.
Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from
3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well.
-Rob
