Re: Windows build woes

Regardless of anything else you do, retry the full build, without cleaning but also without specifying starting from the failure. Sometimes the windows builds don't seem to get all the dependency ordering right. If that is the cause of the failure, repeating the build can resolve it. For

Release process

Reminder: Please add the steps that were taken to get Jim able to grant release blocker for 4.1.4 to the "How to Cook a Release" page at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release - To

Re: Save process and files turned to hashes

This issue is my current focus, so the analysis is very valuable and timely. It seems likely that there is a common problem, applying to both documents and profiles, of AOO believing it has finished writing something too early. Unfortunately, I don't think we have any developers who are

Re: Building OO

Apache Ant(TM) version 1.9.6 compiled on June 29 2015 On 7/20/2017 9:20 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Patricia, could you tell me which version of Apache Ant you are using? Matthias Am 20.07.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: As another data point, I just did a clean checkout of the trunk

Re: Building OO

As another data point, I just did a clean checkout of the trunk and built it on Windows 8.1. Here are my configure parameters: SDK_PATH="/cygdrive/c/Program Files/Microsoft SDKs/Windows/v7.0" ./configure \ --enable-symbols \ --disable-strip-solver \

Re: Ide for Open Office (was Building OO)

I use Visual Studio as a debug tool, and sometimes as an editor. I do my builds in a Cygwin shell, following https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Windows_7.2C_Windows_8.1.2C_Windows_10 instructions. I edit using either gvim or Visual Studio depending

Re: AOO 4.1.4 Cannot access to Options Security macros

Would it make sense to put the "official" configuration options in "How to Cook a Release"? It would make it more of a one-stop shop for the release construction information. On 6/23/2017 8:14 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Am 23.06.2017 um 16:44 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: You don't need the

Re: AOO 4.1.4 Cannot access to Options Security macros

I have reproduced the problem in my US English 4.1.4, and also a debug build based on the trunk but with additional 4.1.4 changes. On 6/23/2017 7:01 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi! Confirmed on Windows 7. These builds are primarily meant for testing the build process and the different

Re: A refactoring proposal

On 6/18/2017 5:51 AM, Carl Marcum wrote: On 06/17/2017 01:52 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: Without going into details here, some recently fixed security issues have related to the use of fixed size arrays without bounds checks. In general, that is not a very robust programming practice

Re: A refactoring proposal

this youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86xWVb4XIyE And since I learned C++ in the 90ies, but never used it I thought it is a good invest. Am 18.06.2017 um 01:06 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I don't know. I have not read that particular book. If the code snippet includes "using name

Re: A refactoring proposal

array example: array<Circle,10> myarray so std::array::at is equal to the arrayexample? sorry if the question is dumb. I am not sure if what I know is the same what you talk about. I am in the "early carrier" category. lol. All the best Peter Am 17.06.2017 um 19:52 schrieb Patri

Re: A refactoring proposal

at the screen when building AOO I see a lot of messages that make me think that the code could need a review... Your suggestion sounds very reasonable to me! Kind regards, Matthias Am 17.06.2017 um 19:52 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: Without going into details here, some recently fixed security issues

A refactoring proposal

Without going into details here, some recently fixed security issues have related to the use of fixed size arrays without bounds checks. In general, that is not a very robust programming practice. It depends on careful checking in the source code to prevent array overflow. I suggest a project

Re: Failing to build 4.1.4

The new build, done clean and incorporating Matthias' suggested change, completed successfully. Thanks again for the suggestions. On 6/2/2017 11:20 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: Thanks for the suggestions. I am doing a clean build, but it takes a while on Windows 8.1. I have 441 GB of free

Re: Failing to build 4.1.4

Thanks for the suggestions. I am doing a clean build, but it takes a while on Windows 8.1. I have 441 GB of free space on the disk, so I don't think that is the problem. On 6/2/2017 11:02 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 02.06.2017 um 18:51 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I checked out 4.1.4, and tried

Re: Failing to build 4.1.4

ar.gz; That source is not existent any more and I had to change to: --with-epm-url=https://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/epm-3.7.tar.gz (See: https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO ) Regards, Matthias Am 02.06.2017 um 18:51 schrieb Pat

Failing to build 4.1.4

I checked out 4.1.4, and tried to build it, Windows 8.1. The build fails right at the end. I'm attaching my configure parameters. Any tips for how to fix this? ... unopkg.exe sync --verbose -env:UNO_JAVA_JFW_ENV_JREHOME=true 2>&1 | ... ... creating archive file ... ... cleaning the output tree

Re: Security (was bugzilla)

Since this is getting into specifics of security issues, I think it should be moved to the security list. On 5/22/2017 1:22 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Well, I see only 2 attack path for us. Ssh interface and the macro/scripting interface. SSH or web we need to update libs, so wee need a flexible

Re: Bugzilla

On 5/20/2017 1:43 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi Patricia Am .05.2017, 22:04 Uhr, schrieb Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>: ... A retired Sun or StarOffice person who understands how the code is put together could save me a lot of time. My current low level objective is to find where

Re: Bugzilla

On 5/20/2017 9:07 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi all Am .05.2017, 16:32 Uhr, schrieb esh1907 : Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project? I think this is the wrong way to go. We can't get the

Re: Bugzilla

On 5/20/2017 7:32 AM, esh1907 wrote: Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project? If you can see a way to make this happen, it would be very helpful. Even having someone familiar with the source code available as a

Re: OpenOffice

The OpenOffice name is probably the best asset we have for attracting volunteers. On 5/15/2017 11:26 AM, esh1907 wrote: But for releases and interesting stuff, people are needed ("chicken or the egg")... On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Nah. That

Re: Apache OpenOffice NG

On 5/2/2017 8:42 AM, Jorg Schmidt wrote: From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] The issue that I see is that our end-user community is not the same as, for example, subversion... I would hazard that the vast majority of AOO users have no idea what "open source" means and the

Re: [GitHub] Missing tag for 4.1.3 release

If it needs to be done early, put it early in the document. In general, what needs doing should drive the form of the "How to Cook a Release" document. If the current form does not accommodate a necessary step, change it. The objective is to have a complete recipe. We currently have two

Taking a month off

I have a lot of non-Apache activities over the next month, so I'm taking a break from OpenOffice. I've made some progress towards learning my way around the code and data structures, but it is taking time. - To unsubscribe,

Re: Documentation needs

On 2/14/2017 10:40 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: Hello, From: Patricia Shanahan [mailto:p...@acm.org] I'm sure our documentation needs work, and there is someone with writing, editing, and copyediting skills hoping to help. The doc@ list seems to be dead, except for one message posted this year

Documentation needs

I'm sure our documentation needs work, and there is someone with writing, editing, and copyediting skills hoping to help. The doc@ list seems to be dead, except for one message posted this year. What would be the best way to get started on improving our website or documentation?

Re: Increase the number of tables in Calc

In looking at AOO source code, I'm finding lots of uses of fixed size arrays. As far as I can tell, there is little use of the STL data structures. I assume this reflects conditions when StarOffice was designed. On 2/5/2017 7:42 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: From: Damjan Jovanovic

Re: AOO debugging revamp

sn't have disk space for a debug build anyway... On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: Applying the patch fixed the vcl case, but not the one I really care about, main/sw On 1/29/2017 6:51 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: On 1/29/2017 5:59 PM, Damjan Jova

Re: AOO debugging revamp

Applying the patch fixed the vcl case, but not the one I really care about, main/sw On 1/29/2017 6:51 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: On 1/29/2017 5:59 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: I am trying a Windows rebuild now. In the meanwhile, what debugger are you using? Can you debug any other modules

Re: AOO debugging revamp

tp://windows.mk>. If so, please try the attached patch which should do that. I'll try it. On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org <mailto:p...@acm.org>> wrote: On 1/25/2017 9:35 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Hi For a while I've notic

Re: AOO debugging revamp

On 1/25/2017 9:35 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Hi For a while I've noticed how gbuild modules don't have debug symbols unless built with the maximum debug level ("./configure --enable-debug" globally or "build debug=true" per module) which also produces oceans of log messages we usually don't

Re: Difficulty with dmake

p. Damjan On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: I am trying to set up a new debug environment, incorporating the recent changes to how debug works. Unfortunately, my configure-and-bootstrap cannot find dmake. It looks for it in a different URL from t

Difficulty with dmake

I am trying to set up a new debug environment, incorporating the recent changes to how debug works. Unfortunately, my configure-and-bootstrap cannot find dmake. It looks for it in a different URL from the one specified as DMAKE_URL from configure. run_configure.sh contains my configure

Re: buildbot failure in on openoffice-linux32-nightly

I am being held up by a similar failure on Windows 8.1: checking if C:/ant/bin/ant works... Ant works checking Ant lib directory... Ant lib directory found. checking whether ant is >= 1.6.0... yes, 1.9.6 ./configure: line 22505: syntax error near unexpected token `else' ./configure: line 22505:

Re: Generating symbols for setup_native

to rebuild the module I need right now. Thanks for the suggestions. On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: I built with --enable-symbols in the configure parameters. For several modules, I can get symbols generated using: make clean; make debug=3Dt

Generating symbols for setup_native

I built with --enable-symbols in the configure parameters. For several modules, I can get symbols generated using: make clean; make debug=3Dtrue and copying the updated .dll files. I just tried this for main/setup_native and there does not seem to be a suitable makefile. Is there any way

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

We also need to split tasks out into those that primarily need OpenOffice user skills, and those that require digging deeply into the implementation code. In the long term, I think I may be on the leading edge of a major future source of open software developers - retirees. On 1/14/2017

Re: future of OpenOffice

ore...@tasit.net>: On 11.01.2017 09:44, Patricia Shanahan wrote: On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy �kos wrote: Hi, it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be merged in OpenOffice. That choice of license was very unfortunate, and a regrettable barrier to cooperation b

Re: future of OpenOffice

On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy Ákos wrote: Hi, it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be merged in OpenOffice. That choice of license was very unfortunate, and a regrettable barrier to cooperation between the projects. When LO split off they could have kept the Apache

Re: Error on enum statement. Can sombody take a little time and explain the enum and the error?

If this is the 4.1.3 source, it has been compiled many times. I would look for a configuration problem affecting the the value of bits_per_pixel. On 01/02/2017 06:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: -Original Message- From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:legi...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January

Fwd: access grant

I am confused about this. I believe Zsolt is now a member of our "committers" group. Is there another step I need to do to give svn access? If so, what is it? Forwarded Message Subject: access grant Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 18:19:33 +0100 From: Zsolt Kúti

Re: [discussion] Roadmap for Open Office

On 12/5/2016 12:35 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: ... # Concerning 12h period. (did not find who brought this up :) ) What I mean is that it would be great if we could devide all activities in good estimate able chunks. Agile methology claims everything that an experienced developer estimates beyond

Re: Is there still someone who build for Solaris/Openindiana

On 12/6/2016 1:55 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi all I'm going to the configure script and I recognize that there are still parts for solaris. As far as I know, the last version who build with solaris was the AOO 3.4.x. My question is, if we should ride off the Solaris stuff or we should keep

Re: [discussion] Roadmap for Open Office

I think there is something that comes before this. Developers need to be able to build AOO. I think we still need more work on the step-by-step instructions, making sure they are complete and work for all systems. On 12/3/2016 4:21 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, I thought a little. There

Re: Hash values of downloaded files

On 11/26/2016 4:22 AM, Brian Barker wrote: ... As I explained, the user quite properly derived the hash value of the installation file. He then - understandably but wrongly - performed the same process to derive the hash value *of* the hash file - instead of inspecting the value provided in that

Re: svn commit: r1770427 - /openoffice/trunk/main/sfx2/source/appl/linkmgr2.cxx

Thanks. On 11/18/2016 11:25 AM, mar...@apache.org wrote: Author: marcus Date: Fri Nov 18 19:25:19 2016 New Revision: 1770427 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1770427=rev Log: Translated comments from German to English Modified: openoffice/trunk/main/sfx2/source/appl/linkmgr2.cxx

Re: [Issue 39199] Translate German comments in source codes into English

Thanks, Marcus. I just updated and reread doc.cxx, the file I'm trying to understand today. Several of the German comments contained useful information that I had not been able to guess from automatic translation. I think we have a good process now. On 11/10/2016 6:14 AM, bugzi...@apache.org

Re: Comments in German

they are reading. On 11/9/2016 5:17 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: That sounds like a good idea! At the times, when StarOffice was a German product no one imagined, that the code would be open-sourced... ;-) Am 09.11.2016 um 14:01 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: As a compromise between doing individual

Re: Comments in German

try to translate it Regards Mechtilde Am 08.11.2016 um 19:35 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I trying to read some AOO source code. There are few comments, and several of the ones I have found are in German, which I don't know. I have tried running some through Google Translate, but the results do not

Comments in German

I trying to read some AOO source code. There are few comments, and several of the ones I have found are in German, which I don't know. I have tried running some through Google Translate, but the results do not make much sense. Is there a translation tool that works better on source code

Re: [Issue 127176] Java not recognized after update to AOO 4.1.3

If this was a known issue before 4.1.3, please list it under the prior bug report, not 127176. 127176 was created after 4.1.3 was released, and describes the problem as a regression relative to 4.1.2. On 10/25/2016 9:23 AM, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:

Re: recruitment@

On 10/21/2016 5:30 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Methinks that the creation of recruitment@ was ill-advised... Most new people are joining dev@ which makes recruitment@ look like a dismal failure. With 20/20 hindsight, it does not seem to have been useful. The question was whether dev@'s high

Re: Failure to build on Windows 10

lps any? John R. D'Orazio On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: I tried to build AOO413 on Windows 10, and got a failure: /MAP /OPT:NOREF -safeseh -nxcompat -dynamicbase -NODEFAULTLIB -RELEASE -DEBUG -INCREMENTAL:NO /SUBSYSTEM:CONSOLE /BASE:0x1b00 -

Re: BSD/Mac-only crash on throwing unspecified exceptions?

On 10/18/2016 11:41 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Hi On FreeBSD, and (according to 1 bug reporter) MacOS X, throwing an exception from a method which isn't specified by that method's exception specifier, eg. "throw Exception();" when the specifier was "throw(RuntimeException)", ends up calling

Re: [RELEASE COOKBOOK] Adding and structuring the content

On 10/15/2016 1:43 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/14/2016 12:11 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna: Marcus wrote: Am 10/13/2016 09:34 PM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release You just need to add some text. Don't care about formatting or

Re: This can not be true

On 10/12/2016 11:55 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: Hello Apache, Hello OpenOffice-PMC, Hello Community, I am absolutely horrified that in a situation where we have to overcome problems together, no reasonable planning takes place. I have started a Wiki page on "How to Cook a Release",

Re: Writing up the release process

On 10/12/2016 2:55 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/12/2016 11:49 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: First, congratulations to everyone on releasing 4.1.3. If this were a conventional, co-located project I'd like to take you all out for a drink after work. Now back to work :-) At this moment, I hope

Writing up the release process

First, congratulations to everyone on releasing 4.1.3. If this were a conventional, co-located project I'd like to take you all out for a drink after work. Now back to work :-) At this moment, I hope everyone remembers exactly what they did, what karma and tools they used, to make the

Re: Need urgent Confluence help

On 10/11/2016 9:23 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: I need to delete a page, and do not have the karma to do it. I either need an addition to my confluence permissions, or for someone who can do so to delete https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Alternative+AOO+4.1.3+Release+Notes

Need urgent Confluence help

I need to delete a page, and do not have the karma to do it. I either need an addition to my confluence permissions, or for someone who can do so to delete https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Alternative+AOO+4.1.3+Release+Notes

Re: Two release notes?

It's an artifact of editing the release notes page - I wanted to be able to compare two slightly different approaches. At this point, the "Alternative" should have been deleted, but I have not yet found out how to do it, or maybe don't have the Confluence karma to do so. It will be fixed

Re: Post vote release actions

On 10/9/2016 8:56 PM, Don Lewis wrote: On 9 Oct, Patricia Shanahan wrote: On 10/9/2016 10:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Marcus wrote: - Change the RC1 into the real release This one takes a few seconds and is best done close to the release. - Uploading to the Sourceforge mirrors

Re: Post vote release actions

On 10/9/2016 10:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Marcus wrote: - Change the RC1 into the real release This one takes a few seconds and is best done close to the release. - Uploading to the Sourceforge mirrors This one takes a few hours. I've already prepared a full svn export of

Re: Post vote release actions

On 10/5/2016 8:26 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: I plan to start the 4.1.3 vote today. This is a draft of the action list assuming the vote passes. Please help by correcting, expanding, and adding anything missing. Just in case anyone missed it, the vote passed so it is time to execute the post

Re: New AOO414 branch?

On 10/9/2016 5:13 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:37:38PM +0200, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Can we open the AOO414 branch? Everything seems to show that 4.1.3 will be coming in a week or so and for sure there is no further code work to do on it. So I'd like to have an

Vote status

With about three hours to go on the vote, I've prepared a spreadsheet based on the [VOTE] thread. The current situation is 10 votes, one [0], nine [+1]. Of the +1 votes, five are binding. The comments indicate a range of different approaches to testing, which is good. Please check the

Re: Signature verification for 4.1.3-RC1

I had to make a change in the key preferences to meet the release signing requirements. I uploaded to a couple of servers, including MIT, and waited a few days. I didn't think we were supposed to update KEYS directly? On 10/8/2016 6:08 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: This is not a blocker for the

Re: 4.1.3_release_blocker granted: [Issue 127045] Enforce Polygon API contracts at run-time

On 10/7/2016 4:06 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/07/2016 01:03 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I would not have granted a release blocker request for this one, because it was already fixed in source in the previous release, 4.1.2-patch1. All 4.1.3 does for it is include it in a binary distribution

Re: Post vote release actions

On 10/7/2016 3:55 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/07/2016 12:43 AM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: ... Thanks. Would you like to be the point person working with Sally on the press release? It would be smooth to coordinate themes between press release and blog post. I don't see a problem to create

Re: 4.1.3_release_blocker granted: [Issue 127045] Enforce Polygon API contracts at run-time

I would not have granted a release blocker request for this one, because it was already fixed in source in the previous release, 4.1.2-patch1. All 4.1.3 does for it is include it in a binary distribution, worth indicating in the release notes, but not a reason to revive the bug. On 10/7/2016

Re: Post vote release actions

On 10/6/2016 5:42 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/05/2016 06:27 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Patricia Shanahan wrote: RM: Update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.3 to show vote result etc. The only important thing to update is that the release is available, since

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote]

Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 08:10:40PM -0700, Patricia Shanahan wrote: Ariel; In all the builds that I have been involved in with AOO we have included a link to a Bugzilla query for all bugs fixed by that release.My concern was 2 fold. One that it would give a wrong impr

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote] Summary

This thread has morphed a bit, and I think a summary may be useful at this time. It started with Keith pointing out, correctly, that I was taking a short cut by starting the vote before all the relevant bugs had been marked "Fixed", although after I was sure they were all fixed in reality.

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - release notes

On 10/6/2016 5:29 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/05/2016 12:23 AM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: Could people working on the bugzilla entries check the status and update as appropriate? I've seen now all issues as "Resolved - Fixed" - or "Verified - Fixed". Note that I did

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote]

On 10/6/2016 5:21 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/06/2016 01:52 PM, schrieb Marcus: ... I'll take a look into the issue list, update the release notes with interesting issues for the average user and keep the full details to the link of BZ issues. done. I've also added a line for the BZ issue

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote]

On 10/5/2016 5:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:17:27PM -0400, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Patricia Shanahan wrote: I believe, based on my tracking and testing, that the release blockers are all fixed. I was hoping the people working

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote]

They are now marked as fixed. On 10/5/2016 3:28 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: I believe, based on my tracking and testing, that the release blockers are all fixed. I was hoping the people working on the bugs, especially those who requested release_blocker, will update them ASAP. On 10/5/2016 2

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

On 10/5/2016 2:52 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 04/10/2016 Mechtilde wrote: Apache OpenOffice is a project with a wide user base, who only use the binaries. So it is important to release well defined and tested binaries. Yes, this is important. As we did for 4.1.2, I would leave PMC members

Re: {Dicuss] [Vote]

I believe, based on my tracking and testing, that the release blockers are all fixed. I was hoping the people working on the bugs, especially those who requested release_blocker, will update them ASAP. On 10/5/2016 2:35 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Just a procedural Question. How can we be

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 4.1.3 RC1

On 10/5/2016 2:07 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: The Apache OpenOffice 4.1.3 source and binaries, https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.3-rc1/, contain several bug fixes. See the draft release notes at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.3+Release+Notes

[VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 4.1.3 RC1

The Apache OpenOffice 4.1.3 source and binaries, https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.3-rc1/, contain several bug fixes. See the draft release notes at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.3+Release+Notes Please vote on releasing it as 4.1.3 by

Post vote release actions

I plan to start the 4.1.3 vote today. This is a draft of the action list assuming the vote passes. Please help by correcting, expanding, and adding anything missing. RM: Update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.3 to show vote result etc. RM: Edit

Re: 4.1.3_release_blocker denied: [Issue 126622] Base 4.1.2 does not open Tables and Queries in Mac OSX

On 10/5/2016 2:32 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2016-10-05, 12:48 AM Andrea Pescetti wrote: Larry Gusaas wrote: Is this approved or not approved as a release blocker??? I thought there was a fix for this. It is essential that this is fixed for Mac users. As I understand it, the reason is lack

Ready to Vote on 4.1.3?

Please post only objections to calling a vote on 4.1.3 tomorrow. I will treat silence as consent. As far as I can tell, we are ready to go. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional

Testing 4.1.3

I have done some basic testing for the following environments and language versions: Windows 7 en_GB Windows 8.1 en_GB, fr Windows 10 en_GB Ubuntu 16.04 en_GB - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - release notes

denied it 4.1.3 release blocker, but added a request for 4.1.4. On 10/4/2016 2:47 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/04/2016 10:31 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.3+Release+Notes ah, thanks. I've updated some text (e.g., separated the sec

Re: Question about spell check

On 10/4/2016 1:15 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/04/2016 09:44 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I downloaded and installed Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_Win_x86_install_en-GB.exe. To my distress, when I first started it, it accepted "color" (US spelling) and rejected "colour" (English s

Question about spell check

I downloaded and installed Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_Win_x86_install_en-GB.exe. To my distress, when I first started it, it accepted "color" (US spelling) and rejected "colour" (English spelling). I thought perhaps it picked up my previous use of en-US from my profile, but I got the same

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

On 10/4/2016 4:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Oct 3, 2016, at 3:49 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: On 10/3/2016 12:45 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/03/2016 09:40 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: Testing seems to be going well, but there is a very specific requirement for a r

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

:11 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 04.10.2016 um 00:30 schrieb Marcus: Am 10/03/2016 11:26 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: On 10/3/2016 2:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Marcus wrote: wow, *all signed source code packages* ? I assume that this does not literally mean that you must test the .bz2,

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

at dist.apache.org. Apache OpenOffice is a project with a wide user base, who only use the binaries. So it is important to release well defined and tested binaries. Otherwise support becomes hell. Kind regards Am 04.10.2016 um 01:58 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: On 10/3/2016 3:30 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/03

Apache OpenOffice release notification

The Apache OpenOffice project is currently preparing and testing a release candidate, 4.1.3-rc1. The total size of the artifacts, including the binary files, exceeds a gigabyte, so the release policy calls for notifying Infrastructure. I do not expect significant Infrastructure impact because

Infra notification?

According to http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#heads-up, infra needs to be notified in advance of releases of more than 1GB. What is the total size of our binaries? Do our releases really count for this, because most downloading will be from SourceForge, not ASF mirrors.

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

On 10/3/2016 3:30 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/03/2016 11:26 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: On 10/3/2016 2:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Marcus wrote: wow, *all signed source code packages* ? I assume that this does not literally mean that you must test the .bz2, the .gz and the .zip

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

On 10/3/2016 2:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Marcus wrote: wow, *all signed source code packages* ? I assume that this does not literally mean that you must test the .bz2, the .gz and the .zip. They are equivalent. This sentence is for when a project makes a release composed of different

Re: Testing 4.1.3

/2016 08:33 PM, schrieb Marcus: Am 09/25/2016 04:33 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: I suggest that people start downloading and testing 4.1.3 as soon as there are binaries they can run. I can't start the formal vote period until we have a complete release candidate. thanks for the pointer, I'll wait

Re: Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

On 10/3/2016 12:45 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10/03/2016 09:40 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan: Testing seems to be going well, but there is a very specific requirement for a release. A PMC member, to cast a binding +1 vote approving a relese, needs to have built the software from source and tested

Testing 4.1.3 - source builds

Testing seems to be going well, but there is a very specific requirement for a release. A PMC member, to cast a binding +1 vote approving a relese, needs to have built the software from source and tested it on a machine under the PMC member's control. See

Re: [Noob] Code question

Here's an answer to part of your question. On 10/2/2016 9:49 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: ... What does SAL NO VTABLE mean? Is it macro code? ... It's time to start using the OpenOffice OpenGrok at http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/ (Or use find and grep in combination, but that takes

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >