Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Matthias Seidel]

Good to know...

Time to update the Release Schedule on cWiki? ;-)

Regards, Matthias


Am 24.05.2017 um 20:37 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 24.05.2017 um 14:06 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
>> release manager :)
>
> yes, you are. There was no vote or other formal process. Just a
> proposal and nobody objected. So, sometimes it comes fast and easy. :-)
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>> As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
>> latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
>> 4.1.4. As such, HEAD of
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/
>> represents what will turn into the likely release.
>>
>> I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
>> ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.
>>
>> Comments? Feedback?
>>
>>> On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jim
>>>
>>> Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>>>
 I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
 release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
 because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
 want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
 be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.
>>>
>>> I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not
>>> really a blocker.
>>>
>>> Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?
>>>
>>> Regards, Raphael
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Marcus]

Am 24.05.2017 um 14:06 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
release manager :)


yes, you are. There was no vote or other formal process. Just a proposal 
and nobody objected. So, sometimes it comes fast and easy. :-)


Marcus




As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
4.1.4. As such, HEAD of http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/
represents what will turn into the likely release.

I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.

Comments? Feedback?


On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher  wrote:

Hi Jim

Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :


I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.


I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not really a 
blocker.

Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?

Regards, Raphael



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Peter Kovacs]

Awesome! 


Am 24. Mai 2017 14:06:17 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
>release manager :)
>
>As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
>latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
>4.1.4. As such, HEAD of
>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/
>represents what will turn into the likely release.
>
>I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
>ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.
>
>Comments? Feedback?
>
>> On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher
> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Jim
>> 
>> Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>> 
>>> I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
>>> release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
>>> because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
>>> want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
>>> be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.
>> 
>> I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not
>really a blocker.
>> 
>> Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?
>> 
>> Regards, Raphael
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
>> 
>> -
>> 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

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Matthias Seidel]

Hi Raphael,

SDK_PATH="/cygdrive/c/Microsoft_SDKs/Windows/v7.0"
./configure \
--with-frame-home="$SDK_PATH" \
--with-psdk-home="$SDK_PATH" \
--with-midl-path="$SDK_PATH/bin" \
--with-ant-home="/cygdrive/c/apache-ant-1.9.9" \
--with-jdk-home="C:/PROGRA~1/Java/JDK17~1.0_8" \
--with-csc-path="C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v3.5" \
--with-cl-home="C:/PROGRA~1/MICROS~1.0/VC" \
--with-asm-home="C:/PROGRA~1/MICROS~1.0/VC/bin" \
   
--with-dmake-url="https://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2;
\
   
--with-epm-url="https://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/epm-3.7.tar.gz;
\
--with-directx-home="C:/Microsoft_DirectX_SDK_June_2010" \
--disable-nss-module \
--without-junit \
--disable-pch \
--disable-atl \
--disable-activex \
--enable-category-b \
--with-lang="en-US de pt ja" \
--enable-bundled-dictionaries \
--with-nsis-path="C:/NSIS"

I followed the steps in our Wiki and avoided spaces in the path. The
shortened Windows paths may also differ for your system.

As I said before, these are most likely not the official build options,
but they work (for me).

Regards, Matthias


Am 24.05.2017 um 17:56 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
> Hi Matthias
>
> Am .05.2017, 16:21 Uhr, schrieb Matthias Seidel
> :
>
>> Hi Raphael,
>>
>> I did manage to build 4.1.4 (en-US, de, ja, pt) on Windows 7, although I
>> am not sure if I use the correct configure.
>> (Andrea did post a link some time ago, but I am not able to it...)
>>
>> What is PSDK referring to?
> I think, I massed up the installation of the SDK's
>
> Can you post the configuration of your builds?
>
> Regards, Raphael
>
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi Matthias

Am .05.2017, 16:21 Uhr, schrieb Matthias Seidel  
:



Hi Raphael,

I did manage to build 4.1.4 (en-US, de, ja, pt) on Windows 7, although I
am not sure if I use the correct configure.
(Andrea did post a link some time ago, but I am not able to it...)

What is PSDK referring to?

I think, I massed up the installation of the SDK's

Can you post the configuration of your builds?

Regards, Raphael


--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Matthias Seidel]

Hi Raphael,

I did manage to build 4.1.4 (en-US, de, ja, pt) on Windows 7, although I
am not sure if I use the correct configure.
(Andrea did post a link some time ago, but I am not able to it...)

What is PSDK referring to?

Matthias

P.S.: I followed this guide:
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Windows_7.2C_Windows_8.1.2C_Windows_10


Am 24.05.2017 um 15:09 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
> Hi All
>
> I have still a fight with the Windows SDK. For some reasons, PSDK is
> not recognized.
>
> Regards, Raphael
>
> Am .05.2017, 14:06 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>
>> I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
>> release manager :)
>>
>> As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
>> latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
>> 4.1.4. As such, HEAD of
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/
>> represents what will turn into the likely release.
>>
>> I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
>> ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.
>>
>> Comments? Feedback?
>>
>>> On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jim
>>>
>>> Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>>>
 I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
 release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
 because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
 want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
 be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.
>>>
>>> I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not
>>> really a blocker.
>>>
>>> Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?
>>>
>>> Regards, Raphael
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
>>>
>>> -
>>> 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
>>
>
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi All

I have still a fight with the Windows SDK. For some reasons, PSDK is not  
recognized.


Regards, Raphael

Am .05.2017, 14:06 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :


I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
release manager :)

As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
4.1.4. As such, HEAD of  
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/

represents what will turn into the likely release.

I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.

Comments? Feedback?

On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher  
 wrote:


Hi Jim

Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :


I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.


I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not  
really a blocker.


Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?

Regards, Raphael


--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU

-
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




--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Status: 4.1.4

[Jim Jagielski]

I've been operating under the assumption that I *am* the
release manager :)

As such, I think we should shoot for a release next week at the
latest. Last I checked, there were no remaining blockers for
4.1.4. As such, HEAD of http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/AOO414/
represents what will turn into the likely release.

I'll be doing macOS/OSX build and can also do the CentOS 5 32/64 bit
ones as well (rpm and deb), if required.

Comments? Feedback?

> On May 23, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Raphael Bircher  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim
> 
> Am .05.2017, 15:53 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski :
> 
>> I am going thru the proposed blockers in anticipation of a AOO 4.1.4
>> release. I have not approved the 2 graphics-related mods, simply
>> because even though they look like they might be easy, I don't
>> want to subject ourselves to the risk, even as small as it might
>> be. Plus, good PR for 4.2.0.
> 
> I'm fine with this. From the release criteria point of view it's not really a 
> blocker.
> 
> Does this also mean, that you take over the Release Nanager?
> 
> Regards, Raphael
> 
> 
> -- 
> My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
> 
> -
> 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: Fwd: Problem with Open Office before and after installing new update

[Peter Kovacs]

I have made some thought on file security. I think that the backup strategy is 
not good at all. 
I rather propose to copy the original to a temp folder. Then we work on the 
file and at save time we save first the temp file and then copy it back. 
Before we copy back we check the health of the copy making sure it's in good 
state. 
With this strategy we should always have a working copy available. 

Haven't check the necessary changes yet. 
It is just an idea. 

Am 23. Mai 2017 23:25:02 MESZ schrieb Hagar Delest :
>Le 23/05/2017 à 22:44, Rory O'Farrell a écrit :
>> On Tue, 23 May 2017 22:11:37 +0200
>> Hagar Delest  wrote:
>>> Le 22/05/2017 à 10:16, Rory O'Farrell a écrit :
 On Mon, 22 May 2017 09:57:31 +0200
 Peter Kovacs  wrote:
> Thanks for the sum up.
>
> Still I think we should find a solution.
> So i adf backup at the start of editing session  to the list.
>
> Is there a bug for this?
 There certainly ought be, but I cannot point to one.

 I think Hagar has remarked on Forum of one instance of spellcheck
>or file corruption on his (work) Windows system, and with great
>respect, that might be due to a freak close down on his part.  In this
>sort of fault finding the user reports of their actions are
>"unreliable", as they often feel they are being trapped into an
>admission of improper computer use.

 In ten years of heavy use  of StarOffice/OO (last years on linux) I
>have experienced file corruption or spellcheck problems on very few
>occasions, caused by unexpected power cuts in storms.  My computer
>experience goes back to 1965 (Fortran II on an IBM 1640), so I am aware
>of the need for system in their use,

 Rory
>>> There is a bug report for the ### and for the dictionary issue (but
>the latter was closed as fixed).
>>> Never heard of a feature request to have a backup of the
>registrymodification.xcu file. Sounds a good idea but still needs
>tweaking from user to restore the former file.
>>
>> Hager,
>>
>> My thoughts on a backup were that the file opened at start of an
>editing session should be backed up, so that in the event that the
>edited file corrupted (the ### problem) the previous version remained
>available.  It is bad enough to lose a session of edits, but how much
>worse to lose the entire file as often occurs with the ### problem 
>Having regard to the large size of current hard disks, I feel that this
>backup procedure (might it need to be a backup of a backup?) should be
>enabled by default
>I thought the backup proposed by Peter was for the registrymodification
>file. After second reading, it was about any file at all. Understood.
>Of course, that should be the standard process.
>I think that the new file should be written as a temporary file next to
>the original one and the original deleted and the new one renamed after
>the system has confirmation from the OS that the save is complete.
>I think that when saving a file in MS Office, we can see such temporary
>files appear and disappear when saving.
>
>>> As for the spellcheck corruption, I noticed quite recently that it
>could be in fact a temporary glitch. It happened on a big file (25MB),
>sometimes all the text is underlined and sometimes there is no
>underline at all (even where there should be). This behavior disappear
>after some time (haven't yet investigated what is needed, reboot or
>Windows session...)
>> Perhaps such a file is at the limit of what OO can comfortably
>handle.  I know from my own experience that large files can be slow to
>format correctly, depending where in the file the cursor was last
>positioned.  The formatting seems to start at the cursor position and
>seems to take several passes through the file until it stabilises.  The
>### problem you report may be an instance of this and might have
>cleared with the stabilisation of the formatting.
>As far as I remember, even waiting for a long time doesn't change
>anything.
>No real time to investigate when that file is open but will try to
>record if there is something special.
>
>Hagar
>
>
>-
>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