RE: Which source files in release?
Instead of removing the .svn dirs/files with a script, use the built in 'svn
export' which exports the
checkout without all the .svn dirs/files.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.ref.svn.c.export.html
Gav...
> -Original Message-
> From: Patricia Shanahan [mailto:p...@acm.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 11:28 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Which source files in release?
>
> I just saw the bug report
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605, "Make sure the source
> package does not contain extra files"
>
> Since our build instructions and processes are based on the result of an svn
> checkout, basing the source package on one seemed obvious to me. The
> only change that seems to me to be absolutely required is removing the .svn
> directories, and that is a one-liner:
>
> find . -type d -name '.svn' -exec rm -fr '{}' ';'
>
> Removing other dot files is a refinement, but I think even without that I am
> closer to what should be packaged than working from the result of a
> configure.
>
> On 9/30/2016 5:53 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> > I am trying to select the files that should go in the zip and tar
> > files for the source release for 4.1.3.
> >
> > I did a clean checkout of the 4.1.3 branch, and then deleted the .svn
> > directories that I know do not belong in the source release.
> >
> > The 4.1.2 release includes the following dot files:
> >
> > ./aoo-4.1.2/main/extras/unx/source/kde/applnk/.directory
> > ./aoo-4.1.2/main/vos/docu/.html
> >
> > The 4.1.3 tree contains those, and the following additional dot files:
> >
> > ./AOO413/main/.hgignore
> > ./AOO413/main/.hgtags
> > ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.classpath
> > ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.project
> > ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.settings
> > ./AOO413/test/testassistant.feature/.project
> > ./AOO413/test/testcommon/.classpath
> > ./AOO413/test/testcommon/.project
> > ./AOO413/test/testgui/.classpath
> > ./AOO413/test/testgui/.project
> > ./AOO413/test/testgui/.settings
> > ./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_linux
> > ./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_win
> > ./AOO413/test/testuno/.externalToolBuilders
> > ./AOO413/test/testuno/.project
> >
> > The .project and .classpath files may be to do with making it easier
> > to set up and run the tests under Eclipse.
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> > -
> > 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
>
>
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4664/13120 - Release Date: 09/30/16
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Which source files in release?
On 9/30/2016 9:59 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: there is no need to reinvent the wheel, I guess ;) Indeed. I've bumped the bug report just to give visibility to the scripts we already had. you need to fix the ant build script first, see the bug report Fixing the script results in a commit. We agree that this is just a tool and that we can fix the script on trunk and build the AOO413 source with the fixed version without committing it to AOO413, right? Otherwise we would (theoretically) have to rebuild releases for a fix in a tool to get the same results. OK, I won't rock the 4.1.3 boat. When we come to look at this in the trunk and/or 4.1.4, some thought should be given to the weirdness of running a checkout through a procedure that is designed to tailor it to a particular system, and trying to generate the system independent source files from that. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Introduction
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Xen wrote: > R. Mark Aldrich schreef op 28-09-2016 22:55: > > Section 5 starts with >> "A useful shortcut notation you will often see on the lists.", which >> makes sense if you read it as Yoda, but I think it would make more >> sense to change it to "You will often see useful shortcut notations on >> the lists." >> > > That has a different meaning. > > The author is not saying that you will often see useful shortcut notations > on the lists. The phrase references a part that has not been uttered, so > you would have to say something like "Some useful you may come across > on the lists are "dev" and "..." as abbreviations of mailing lists" -- > because the existing statement consists of parts, and so if you want to put > it "back together" you must unite those parts. > > In general you cannot rewrite individual statements, you must rewrite the > whole thing if you want the text to keep its flow and consistency and > meaning. > > It's the same as > > "Something you may want to know about... Yesterday I came across something > I want you to know, and it is that ...". It is just a way of conversing, or > phrasing things. > > or > > "That thing I was thinking about. You have heard it before. It is ...". > > So if you change it, you must at least rewrite the whole section. But > ideally you would change the whole thing (in style) ;-). > > Personally I would only do so if I thought a different style would be more > readable and more comfortable or convenient as a way of relaxing. > > Less staccato, and more fluid, perhaps. > > Anyway, just saying ;-). > > However the current style precisely expresses what it needed to express. > Fixing stuff and then discovering that the result is worse than before is > not a good way to spend time ;-). > > Regards. I still don't quite get what this phrase is trying to express, and it really sounds like Yoda to me too. I would certainly try to rephrase it so it flows better. My understanding is that this is what it's trying to get across: "You will often find in the mailing lists that a shortcut notation is used to refer to the same lists. Writing a list name in full, like dev@openoffice.apache.org can be tedious. So you will often see it called just "dev"." > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > Regards, -- John R. D'Orazio
Re: [DISCUSS] 4.1.4 Release Manager?
On 9/30/2016 10:15 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 03:58:11PM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: There are now release blocker requests for 4.1.4, so we need a release manager to decide on them. If nobody steps in, and/or nobody has any objection, you can count with me. I would be very happy to have Ariel as Release Manager. +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Windows XP confirmation of AOO 4.1.3 r1761381
This time, before running the 2016-09-29 installer, I uninstalled the previous AOO 4.1.3-dev install in my Windows XP VM. That installed fine. It appears that the checking for installed VC++ redistributables is invisible on Windows XP, but visible on Windows 10 Anniversary edition. On the XP system, I found both cases in Windows\WinSxS for VC90 redistributables. (Their manifests and security catalogs, however, are dated 2011.) Looking back at the Windows 10 Anniversary Edition that I also installed on, I can't find recently-added redistributables at all, so I must not know where to be looking. - Dennis > -Original Message- > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 09:53 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Windows XP confirmation of AOO 4.1.3 r1761381 > > I successfully installed the 2016-09-23 AOO 4.1.3-dev (r1761381) > Win_x86_en-US on Windows XP Professional Version 2002 Service Pack 3 > (running in a VirtualBox VM). > > No VC++ 2008 redistributable installation occurred. > > I have not checked anything else at this point. > > -- Dennis E. Hamilton > orc...@apache.org > dennis.hamil...@acm.org+1-206-779-9430 > https://keybase.io/orcmid PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A > X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail > > > > - > 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
RE: Windows 10 Anniversary confirmation of AOO 4.1.3 r1761381
I ran the install of the 2016-09-29 AOO4.1.3-dev r1761381 (still) to see how the VC++ redistributables worked. I saw the redistributables install again, apparently being newer as expected. The main AOO install did not run because the same version was detected as already installed. After uninstalling AOO4.1.3-dev and then again installing the 2016-09-29 install, I saw the VC++ redistributables checks go by quickly, but apparently not with any time installing. The AOO part of the installation proceeded successfully. - Dennis > -Original Message- > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 09:35 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Windows 10 Anniversary confirmation of AOO 4.1.3 r1761381 > > I successfully installed the 2016-09-23 AOO-dev (r1761381) Win_x86_en-US > on Windows 10 Anniversary Edition (Version 1607 build 14393.187). > > There was apparently no VC++ 2008 redistributables already on the > system, and the runtime installation was performed. > > I have not checked anything else at this point. > > -- Dennis E. Hamilton > orc...@apache.org > dennis.hamil...@acm.org+1-206-779-9430 > https://keybase.io/orcmid PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A > X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail > > > > - > 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
Re: [DISCUSS] 4.1.4 Release Manager?
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 03:58:11PM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: There are now release blocker requests for 4.1.4, so we need a release manager to decide on them. If nobody steps in, and/or nobody has any objection, you can count with me. I would be very happy to have Ariel as Release Manager. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Which source files in release?
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: there is no need to reinvent the wheel, I guess ;) Indeed. I've bumped the bug report just to give visibility to the scripts we already had. you need to fix the ant build script first, see the bug report Fixing the script results in a commit. We agree that this is just a tool and that we can fix the script on trunk and build the AOO413 source with the fixed version without committing it to AOO413, right? Otherwise we would (theoretically) have to rebuild releases for a fix in a tool to get the same results. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Translate offline
Hi i continue doing some translations to AOO, but I saw that translate.apache.org is offline. If someone can do something to warn the infra, is a good thing. Thanks in advance, Claudio Ferreira
Successfully built ApacheOO trunk in Debian Sid (Unstable)
Niltze, all- First time I build ApacheOO in Debian Sid for AMD64. I found this quirk towards the end of the build routine: [...] Calculating Installed-Size... Building Debian binary distribution... dpkg --build openoffice-core03_4.2.0-1_amd64 Packaging failed! Reason is target packaging requires root privileges - acquired with sudo su, for instance); hence, building OO as a normal user fails and developer should: sudo su And, when at directories: aoo-trunk/main$ source ./LinuxX86-64Env.Set.sh cd instsetoo_native/ aoo-trunk/main/instsetoo_native$ build --all -P -- -P Pleased with the outcome: < https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ctm2Vr9UsAEE2gi.jpg:large > < https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ctm2X5iUAAAM3LQ.jpg:large > apt-get install rpm # needed for RPMS build apt-get install lib32gcc-5-dev libx32gcc-5-dev # required by ApacheOO (had issues with gcc 6.x, thus downgraded to) gcc --version gcc (Debian 5.4.1-2) 5.4.1 20160904 [...] apt-get install openjdk-6-jdk (installed from experimental repositories - but not required) as ApacheOO build routine used: java -version openjdk version "1.8.0_102" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_102-8u102-b14.1-2-b14) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.102-b14, mixed mode) Best Professional Regards. -- Jose R R http://metztli.it - Try at no charge http://b2evolution.net for http://OpenShift.com PaaS - from our GitHub http://Nepohualtzintzin.com repository. Cloud the easy way! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Which source files in release?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:19:25AM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > > On Sep 30, 2016, at 07:00, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 06:28:01AM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > >> I just saw the bug report https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605, > >> "Make sure the source package does not contain extra files" > >> > >> Since our build instructions and processes are based on the result of an > >> svn > >> checkout, basing the source package on one seemed obvious to me. The only > >> change that seems to me to be absolutely required is removing the .svn > >> directories, and that is a one-liner: > > > > You better do this inside the build environment: > > > > Why? Because there is no need to reinvent the wheel, I guess ;) (you need to fix the ant build script first, see the bug report) Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Which source files in release?
> On Sep 30, 2016, at 07:00, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 06:28:01AM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> I just saw the bug report https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605, >> "Make sure the source package does not contain extra files" >> >> Since our build instructions and processes are based on the result of an svn >> checkout, basing the source package on one seemed obvious to me. The only >> change that seems to me to be absolutely required is removing the .svn >> directories, and that is a one-liner: > > You better do this inside the build environment: > Why? > cd main > source > cd instsetoo_native/util/ > dmake aoo_srcrelease > > This calls ant with solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml, which has the bug that > was written for macOS, thus it only excludes MacOSXX86Env.* for example, > see > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO413/main/solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml?revision=1760467&view=markup#l32 > > ant ignores those .svn folders, see > https://ant.apache.org/manual/dirtasks.html#defaultexcludes > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Which source files in release?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 06:28:01AM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > I just saw the bug report https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605, > "Make sure the source package does not contain extra files" > > Since our build instructions and processes are based on the result of an svn > checkout, basing the source package on one seemed obvious to me. The only > change that seems to me to be absolutely required is removing the .svn > directories, and that is a one-liner: You better do this inside the build environment: cd main source cd instsetoo_native/util/ dmake aoo_srcrelease This calls ant with solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml, which has the bug that was written for macOS, thus it only excludes MacOSXX86Env.* for example, see https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO413/main/solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml?revision=1760467&view=markup#l32 ant ignores those .svn folders, see https://ant.apache.org/manual/dirtasks.html#defaultexcludes Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Which source files in release?
I just saw the bug report
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605, "Make sure the source
package does not contain extra files"
Since our build instructions and processes are based on the result of an
svn checkout, basing the source package on one seemed obvious to me. The
only change that seems to me to be absolutely required is removing the
.svn directories, and that is a one-liner:
find . -type d -name '.svn' -exec rm -fr '{}' ';'
Removing other dot files is a refinement, but I think even without that
I am closer to what should be packaged than working from the result of a
configure.
On 9/30/2016 5:53 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
I am trying to select the files that should go in the zip and tar files
for the source release for 4.1.3.
I did a clean checkout of the 4.1.3 branch, and then deleted the .svn
directories that I know do not belong in the source release.
The 4.1.2 release includes the following dot files:
./aoo-4.1.2/main/extras/unx/source/kde/applnk/.directory
./aoo-4.1.2/main/vos/docu/.html
The 4.1.3 tree contains those, and the following additional dot files:
./AOO413/main/.hgignore
./AOO413/main/.hgtags
./AOO413/test/testassistant/.classpath
./AOO413/test/testassistant/.project
./AOO413/test/testassistant/.settings
./AOO413/test/testassistant.feature/.project
./AOO413/test/testcommon/.classpath
./AOO413/test/testcommon/.project
./AOO413/test/testgui/.classpath
./AOO413/test/testgui/.project
./AOO413/test/testgui/.settings
./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_linux
./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_win
./AOO413/test/testuno/.externalToolBuilders
./AOO413/test/testuno/.project
The .project and .classpath files may be to do with making it easier to
set up and run the tests under Eclipse.
Opinions?
-
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
4.1.4_release_blocker requested: [Issue 126605] Make sure the source package does not contain extra files
Andrea Pescetti has asked for 4.1.4_release_blocker: Issue 126605: Make sure the source package does not contain extra files https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126605 --- Comment #2 from Andrea Pescetti --- This is a good candidate for fixing in trunk first and 4.1.4 later. I'm not proposing it as a 4.1.3 blocker since at this stage it is OK to build the source package exactly as done for 4.1.2. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Which source files in release?
I am trying to select the files that should go in the zip and tar files for the source release for 4.1.3. I did a clean checkout of the 4.1.3 branch, and then deleted the .svn directories that I know do not belong in the source release. The 4.1.2 release includes the following dot files: ./aoo-4.1.2/main/extras/unx/source/kde/applnk/.directory ./aoo-4.1.2/main/vos/docu/.html The 4.1.3 tree contains those, and the following additional dot files: ./AOO413/main/.hgignore ./AOO413/main/.hgtags ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.classpath ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.project ./AOO413/test/testassistant/.settings ./AOO413/test/testassistant.feature/.project ./AOO413/test/testcommon/.classpath ./AOO413/test/testcommon/.project ./AOO413/test/testgui/.classpath ./AOO413/test/testgui/.project ./AOO413/test/testgui/.settings ./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_linux ./AOO413/test/testuno/.classpath_win ./AOO413/test/testuno/.externalToolBuilders ./AOO413/test/testuno/.project The .project and .classpath files may be to do with making it easier to set up and run the tests under Eclipse. Opinions? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] 4.1.4 Release Manager?
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 03:58:11PM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > There are now release blocker requests for 4.1.4, so we need a release > manager to decide on them. If nobody steps in, and/or nobody has any objection, you can count with me. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Add This Feature to Writer ASAP
On 30/09/2016 06:09, Kirk Fraser wrote: > The most needed feature is a book section organizer like Scrivner which has Organon jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
