Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5 Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up. I can RM if that's OK with everyone. > On Dec 1, 2017, at 4:37

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

On 12/1/2017 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution > to some 4.1.4 regressions. > > I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the > timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Hi Jim - Works and fixes both 4.1.4 bugs on both 10.7.5 and 10.12.6. Seems to require Java 6 for Base to work on 10.7.5. Regards, Dave > On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > My latest 4.2.0-dev builds are available at > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

My latest 4.2.0-dev builds are available at http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816768/ But these are dmg's not installers. > On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Matthias Seidel >

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

Yes it is :) Thank you. On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Am 26.11.2017 um 19:47 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > > When you get that error, before clicking "OK", please attach gdb and run > > "thread apply all bt", and post the output. > > > >

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

Am 26.11.2017 um 19:47 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > When you get that error, before clicking "OK", please attach gdb and run > "thread apply all bt", and post the output. > > Damjan Hi Damjan, I will do this as soon as I figured out how it works... ;-) gdb=Gnu Debugger? Regards, Matthias > >

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Am 01.12.2017 um 18:09 schrieb Peter Kovacs: For me the existance is not a strong argument. The bug is with 149 votes quite popular. The discussion there is a repeatance that this is basic feature. but we don't know from when the votes are. Or is there a possiblity to see in Bugzilla? The

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

For me the existance is not a strong argument. The bug is with 149 votes quite popular. The discussion there is a repeatance that this is basic feature. I quote from bugzilla: This is absolutely a basic feature, i don't understand why there are more advanced regression types such as

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Hi Jim, Did you have the opportunity to install 4.2.0 on macOS? I would be interested if the new icon does show up: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/setup_native/source/mac/ooo3_installer.icns I created it on Windows with a program called "iConvertIcons" and had no chance

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Am 01.12.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Peter kovacs: The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug. It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office. Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention. Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug. It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office. Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention. Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not find anything in the extentionfile itself I

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

+1 Am 1. Dezember 2017 14:42:44 MEZ schrieb Jim Jagielski : >I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce >4.2.0-B1. > >Should we clone the 4.1.4 release Wiki page (to create a 4.1.5) and >start keeping track there? > >> On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Patricia

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 9:35 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > Switching positions, the last time we discussed release planning, 11/22, > Damjan needed a month or two to finish PostgreSQL driver work before he would > recommend releasing 4.2.0. That seems more like early next year,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Switching positions, the last time we discussed release planning, 11/22, Damjan needed a month or two to finish PostgreSQL driver work before he would recommend releasing 4.2.0. That seems more like early next year, rather than early December I am not sure we should wait that long before

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce 4.2.0-B1. Should we clone the 4.1.4 release Wiki page (to create a 4.1.5) and start keeping track there? > On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution to some 4.1.4 regressions. I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is something to be said for a single announcement so

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is fantastic! Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds... I can provide builds for

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Already discussed in 2013: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e - Mail original - De: "Mechtilde" À: dev@openoffice.apache.org Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58 Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add