Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Hi Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:23 PM, Marcus wrote: > >> Am 10.10.2017 um 22:56 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Hi - >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Marcus wrote: >>> >>> Am 10.10.2017 um 22:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pe

Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)

On 10/10/2017 11:49 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10.10.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Jim Jagielski wrote: I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be ju

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

On 10 Oct, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400 > Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? > > > Does it matter? There is a first time for everything. Why throw all the > 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5? > Or call it 4.1.4.1 Figuring out ho

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

On 10 Oct, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Thx again! > > Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for > a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to > start the process for AOO-415 Not releasing RC4 will considerably delay releasing a version that has the

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Am 10.10.2017 um 22:56 schrieb Dave Fisher: Hi - Sent from my iPhone On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10.10.2017 um 22:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Now the question is, is it OK for us to go ahead, release 4.1.4 with this "know

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Patricia Shanahan wrote: The attached patch fixes this, as well as the business card case. Confirmed. I've just built 4.1.4RC4+patch and the bug was fixed, while 4.1.4RC4 had it. I haven't had the time to check whether this breaks something else yet. To be honest, I don't recall ever using

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Hi - Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 10.10.2017 um 22:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>> >>> Now the question is, is it OK for us to go ahead, release 4.1.4 with this >>> "known issue" and commit to fi

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Pedro Lino wrote: > Hi Andrea, all > > > Remember that the amount of code changes needed to produce something > > named 4.1.5 is quite significant and very much error-prone. Take a > look > > at the relevant issues in case, but for a "quick fix" I would >

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Am 10.10.2017 um 22:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Now the question is, is it OK for us to go ahead, release 4.1.4 with this "known issue" and commit to fixing this and other possible regressions in 4.1.5 next month? Technically, the Release Ma

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Am 10.10.2017 um 21:19 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want >> us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama > > Yes, let's avoid drama, really. > > But I'll still send this "modest proposal", base

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > Now the question is, is it OK for us to go ahead, release 4.1.4 with this > "known issue" and commit to fixing this and other possible regressions in > 4.1.5 next month? Technically, the Release Manager (and I still consider Jim > to b

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > To us a release is/was simply the distributed source package, not a tag in > SVN. But this is a side discussion. > Agreed. But it is a serious discussion since such policy is NOT part of the standard release expectations. Their must be

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Am 10.10.2017 um 21:54 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:05 PM, Marcus wrote: Am 10.10.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Jim Jagielski: The reason is that we have *TAGGED* 4.1.4. :( sad but true, also here we have big bug in our cook book. So, no blame to you. ;-) Creating the SVN tag mus

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 3:05 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 10.10.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> The reason is that we have *TAGGED* 4.1.4. :( > > sad but true, also here we have big bug in our cook book. So, no blame to > you. ;-) > > Creating the SVN tag must not happen as long as the rele

Re: Keep calm and don't over-react Was: Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de] > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 9:17 PM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Keep calm and don't over-react Was: Re: 4.1.4 show stopper! > > Reply to all, not only Jim: > > > > Wow, I just had a day off and now my inbox is exploding. > > H

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

2017-10-10 21:19 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti : > Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want >> us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama >> > > Yes, let's avoid drama, really. > > But I'll still send this "modest proposal", b

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Jim Jagielski wrote: I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama Yes, let's avoid drama, really. But I'll still send this "modest proposal", based on experience: 1) We just go ahead and release 4.1.4 as

Keep calm and don't over-react Was: Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Reply to all, not only Jim: Wow, I just had a day off and now my inbox is exploding. Honestly, was it necessary to act within a few hours? Wouldn't it be better to wait more time? There is no BZ issue, no blocker request, just mails. The builds aren't yet public, no communication was gone

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Am 10.10.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Jim Jagielski: The reason is that we have *TAGGED* 4.1.4. :( sad but true, also here we have big bug in our cook book. So, no blame to you. ;-) Creating the SVN tag must not happen as long as the release is not public on servers and communicated to the world.

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher: I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds with the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick within the ASF policy. in theory this could w

Re: We need BZ triage for a 4.1.5 branch...

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Marcus wrote: > Am 10.10.2017 um 18:52 schrieb Kay Schenk: > >> In light of jimjag's desire to move to 4.1.5 instead of 4.1.4, we need a >> BZ admin to add 4.1.5 to the release info on: >> >> issues.openoffice.org >> > > done > > I can help with syncing from 4.1.

Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)

Am 10.10.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Jim Jagielski wrote: I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if we drop some older

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Am 10.10.2017 um 18:01 schrieb Fernando Cassia: On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell wrote: On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400 Jim Jagielski wrote: Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? Does it matter? There is a first time for everything. Why throw all the 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5? O

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Am 10.10.2017 um 19:40 schrieb Peter kovacs: I support Jim as release manager. I see no big issues, that we can not solve together. I also want that Jim continous as RM. @Jim: Please remember that it's allowed to ask for help when you see much work and less time on your side. ;-) Marcus

Re: We need BZ triage for a 4.1.5 branch...

Am 10.10.2017 um 18:52 schrieb Kay Schenk: In light of jimjag's desire to move to 4.1.5 instead of 4.1.4, we need a BZ admin to add 4.1.5 to the release info on: issues.openoffice.org done I can help with syncing from 4.1.4 to 4.1.5. Marcus --

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

I support Jim as release manager. I see no big issues, that we can not solve together. I can take over at 4.1.5, if needed, but not before. I am sorry. Because currently I am not up to date about the release and have time restraints until 20th. For 4.1.5 we need to communicate, explain the sit

AOO415 branch created

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO415/ exists. It was copied directly from AOO414 HEAD which was/is tags/414

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

I hope you will stay on. I am not sure I would have made the same decision as you about the release number, but in my opinion part of the RM role is bike-shedding prevention by making decisions. I hope that the need to test the patch ASAP does not get lost in the discussion of what to call it.

We need BZ triage for a 4.1.5 branch...

In light of jimjag's desire to move to 4.1.5 instead of 4.1.4, we need a BZ admin to add 4.1.5 to the release info on: issues.openoffice.org I can help with syncing from 4.1.4 to 4.1.5. -- -- MzK "Only the truth will save you now." -- Ensei Tankado

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Hi all -- It's true that changing from 4.1.4 to 4.1.5 requires a bit of work, but really not all that much. It would be better to have Jim continue as RM regardless IMO and others can pitch in. Once the branch is copied to 4.1.5, others can pitch in to do version updates. Non-committers can

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama (which is very, very tiring). As I said, if I stay on, and am still "picked" as RM, my plan would be to simply move on to 4.1.5 which is, at this state, the EXACT s

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Rest assured that I am on standby for the Windows builds! Whatever version it will be... Am 10.10.2017 um 17:04 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present > to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After > being away at

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:59 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400 > Jim Jagielski mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > >> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? > > > Does it matter? There is a first time for everything. Why throw all the > 4.1.4 work away and start again

Re: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

+1 Matthias Am 10.10.2017 um 13:28 schrieb Peter kovacs: > Can we document the issue in bugzilla? > Plus maybe link this discussion in it? > > Am 10. Oktober 2017 12:54:41 MESZ schrieb Pedro Lino : >>> I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment, >> based >>> on trunk bu

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Either way we would have to update the metadata: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127168 It would be quite risky to introduce a fourth digit without testing at this stage... Matthias Am 10.10.2017 um 18:01 schrieb Fernando Cassia: > On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell wrote: >> On Tue, 10 Oc

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400 > Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? > > > Does it matter? There is a first time for everything. Why throw all the > 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5? > Or call it 4.1.4.1 > > Rory +1 FC -

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Peter kovacs wrote: > > That's sad news. :( > > I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional > 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.) > However I would not do any building only the organisational part of > collecting bugs and track

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400 Jim Jagielski wrote: > Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? Does it matter? There is a first time for everything. Why throw all the 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5? Or call it 4.1.4.1 Rory > > > On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Mathias Röllig wrote: > > Hello Raphael! > > Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher: > > I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and > > release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds > > with > the patch. Like

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Have we ever released a X.Y.Za? > On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:25:43 +0200 > Peter kovacs mailto:pe...@apache.org>> wrote: > >> That's sad news. :( >> >> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional >> 4.1.5 if we

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:25:43 +0200 Peter kovacs wrote: > That's sad news. :( > > I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional > 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.) > However I would not do any building only the organisational part of > collecting bugs and track

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

That's sad news. :( I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.) However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement. If that's fine for all. One siden

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Hello Raphael! Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher: > I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and > release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds > with > the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick > within the ASF policy.

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Hi Jim, * I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds with the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick within the ASF policy. Regards Raphael Am .10.2017, 16:35 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jag

Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After being away at confs for ~3weeks, I have quite a bit of a backlog. Who wants to take over. I still am signing up to do the macOS and Linux 32/64 bit builds.

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Once something is tagged it is public. It is official. Removing and/or adjusting tags is something that we cannot and should not do. It is really against ASF policy since it destroys an accurate representation of our history and IP provenance. If someone wishes to take over as RM, I am fine with t

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Hi Andrea, all > Remember that the amount of code changes needed to produce something > named 4.1.5 is quite significant and very much error-prone. Take a look > at the relevant issues in case, but for a "quick fix" I would definitely > stick to 4.1.4, produce 4.1.4-RC5 and vote on RC5

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Am .10.2017, 15:38 Uhr, schrieb Andrea Pescetti : Jim Jagielski wrote: Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to start the process for AOO-415 We are still in time for retiring 4.1.4-RC4 (not 4

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Jim Jagielski wrote: Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to start the process for AOO-415 We are still in time for retiring 4.1.4-RC4 (not 4.1.4 altogether). Builds are on SourceForge but they'

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Don't be confused by my remark about "trunk but with some 4.1.4. changes added". The problem is in the 4.1.4 changes that are in my trunk-based debug environment. Pedro Lino has confirmed that the checked-in trunk does not have the problem. I had a situation in which I had to choose between tr

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

The reason is that we have *TAGGED* 4.1.4. :( > On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:56 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > Why the need to bump the release number, rather than kill RC4 and build RC5? > > On 10/10/2017 5:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Thx again! >> Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 i

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Why the need to bump the release number, rather than kill RC4 and build RC5? On 10/10/2017 5:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Thx again! Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to start the process for A

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Thx again! Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to start the process for AOO-415 > On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:16 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > The attached patch fixes this, as well as the business

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

The attached patch fixes this, as well as the business card case. On 10/10/2017 2:59 AM, Mathias Röllig wrote: Hello! Even on Linux. Problem: linked sections will not be updated if the original section is changed. The button [Synchronise Labels] do nothing other than Tools… → Update → Link

Re: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

Can we document the issue in bugzilla? Plus maybe link this discussion in it? Am 10. Oktober 2017 12:54:41 MESZ schrieb Pedro Lino : > >> I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment, >based >> on trunk but with some 4.1.4 changes added. I need to get some >more >> sle

Re: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

> I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment, based > on trunk but with some 4.1.4 changes added. I need to get some more > sleep before serious debug (it is 2:08 a.m. here). Could someone check > whether it happens in the unmodified trunk? That would narrow it d

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

The equivalent of this patch for my debug environment does fix the labels problem. On 10/10/2017 3:28 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: I have a theory for the Labels issue, and am in the process of building to test it. On an extremely experimental, untested, basis I am attaching a candidate fix.

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

I have a theory for the Labels issue, and am in the process of building to test it. On an extremely experimental, untested, basis I am attaching a candidate fix. On 10/10/2017 2:59 AM, Mathias Röllig wrote: Hello! Even on Linux. Problem: linked sections will not be updated if the original

4.1.4 show stopper! (was: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS)

Hello! Even on Linux. Problem: linked sections will not be updated if the original section is changed. The button [Synchronise Labels] do nothing other than Tools… → Update → Links (or Tools… → Update → Update All). Simply 1. create a new text document 2. insert a section with content 3. i

Re: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

Thanks for the report. I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment, based on trunk but with some 4.1.4 changes added. I need to get some more sleep before serious debug (it is 2:08 a.m. here). Could someone check whether it happens in the unmodified trunk? That would narr

4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

Hello dev, FYI a french user reports this on MacBook Pro SSD OS X 10.12.6 Sierra Run File - New - Business Cards Choose how your business cards will look Click on New document Modifiy the first label When you click on the Synchronize Labels button, the current label is not copied to all others. R