With 8 binding +1 votes, this PASSES.
Thanks to all who tested and voted.
We will continue with the release process.
> On Feb 13, 2023, at 7:38 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffic
Fantastic! Thank you.
> On Feb 23, 2023, at 4:23 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Am 23.02.23 um 15:18 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> With 8 binding +1 votes, this PASSES.
>>
>> Thanks to all who tested and voted.
>>
>> We will c
> On Oct 1, 2023, at 7:44 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> 127154 and 127966 need to be looked at by a Mac developer.
>
Those look pretty old. I should create a quick macOS 4.2.0 dev build for testing
-
To unsubscribe, e-ma
> On Oct 2, 2023, at 12:11 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>
> Is there a step by step how to build AOO on these? Knowing the steps would
> allow someone who is interested to try on their own Mac.
>
> Remind what version of macOS should be the minimum? My 11 year old iMac can
> only be on 10.11.6
> On Oct 4, 2023, at 2:12 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 4:52 PM Jim Jagielski <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 1, 2023, at 7:44 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>>>
>>> 127154 and 12796
> On Oct 5, 2023, at 3:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Oct 4, 2023, at 2:12 PM, Damjan Jovanovic > <mailto:dam...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 4:52 PM Jim Jagielski > <mailto:j...@jagunet.com> <mailto:j...@
I'm back from the All Things Open event, so I signed up for some tasks as well.
> On Oct 18, 2023, at 5:52 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> Am 17.10.23 um 16:52 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 05.10.23 um 16:50 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
I would like to collect ideas for
I'll start some dev builds for 0a12a2c1
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Yep. macOS and Linux 32 and 64 bit builds (as source) are uploaded to dist/dev
> On Oct 24, 2023, at 5:52 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 23.10.23 um 14:34 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I'll start some dev builds for 0a12a2c1
>
> S
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds
of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.15-RC1 as GA.
These artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.15-RC1/
Please cast your vote:
The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> On Nov 1, 2023, at 10:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community
> builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.15-RC1 as GA.
>
> These artifacts can be found at:
>
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/d
Are there any patches or additions anyone thinks would be appropriate to add in
for a RC2 or is RC1 "good enough"?
> On Nov 13, 2023, at 2:32 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> Am 11.11.23 um 22:59 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>> On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 09:51:42AM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> [...]
>>> @Al
Good idea!
> On Nov 19, 2023, at 4:16 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>
> Hello Jim, All,
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 08:59:46AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Are there any patches or additions anyone thinks would be
>> appropriate to add in for a RC2 or is RC1 &q
I am recalling and closing this VOTE as we work on getting a RC2 release out.
Thanks to all who tested and voted!!
> On Nov 1, 2023, at 10:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community
> builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds
of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.15-RC2 as GA.
These artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.15-RC2/
Please cast your vote:
The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
[ ]
> On Nov 28, 2023, at 10:45 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community
> builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.15-RC2 as GA.
>
> These artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/d
Maybe new leadership at TDF will encourage cooperation between LO and AOO
instead of still harboring ill-will between the 2 efforts.
> On Dec 11, 2023, at 2:28 AM, Bidouille wrote:
>
>
> For some months now, the libreoffice community has been in turmoil.
> A new committee is set to oust the e
I call this vote CLOSED. Based on the responses, AOO 4.1.15-RC2 has been
approved as GA.
Thanks to all who tested and voted.
> On Nov 28, 2023, at 10:45 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community
> builds of Apache OpenO
Perfect, thanks! I'll start the xfer to SF tomorrow am
> On Dec 18, 2023, at 1:40 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have now signed and re-uploaded all Windows binaries.
>
> The Release Schedule was updated as far as I was involved:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/displa
I'm up for doing the dev tarballs for Linux and macOS
> On Jan 7, 2024, at 5:55 PM, Keith N. McKenna
> wrote:
>
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> and a happy new year!
>> After successfully releasing AOO 4.1.15 in December we should now work
>> towards a renewed Developer Edition 5 for AO
his a Linux fix only? What does boost do? Improve calculation speed?
>
> I already did a build for Windows, boost is part of our build system.
>
> We need to check for macOS/Linux now.
>
>>
>> In any case, +1 to updating libraries
>
> That is the intention.
&g
Are we ready for a Dev5 in any case?
> On Jan 15, 2024, at 10:02 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 10.01.24 um 19:14 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 10.01.24 um 15:01 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Lets fold this in and build -Dev5 after it's committed
>
&g
Current on AOO42X is c51e9806. Should we start there?
> On Jan 24, 2024, at 12:32 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 24.01.24 um 13:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Are we ready for a Dev5 in any case?
> I am ready as soon as we decide on a Git hash to build.
>>
>&
>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev5/
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>Matthias
>>
>> Am 24.01.24 um 18:32 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 24.01.24 um 13:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> Are we ready for a Dev5 in
> On Jan 30, 2024, at 5:23 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 30.01.24 um 11:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> macOS and Linux64 have also been uploaded.
> Great!
I'll start on Linux32 bit builds today.
>>
>> Since these are dev
> On Jan 30, 2024, at 7:53 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 30, 2024, at 5:23 AM, Matthias Seidel
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> Am 30.01.24 um 11:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> macOS and Linux64 have also been upload
We have community builds of AOO 4.2.0-Dev5 available for download and testing
at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev5/
We encourage people to try these builds out and to provide feedback and PRs
against them; These are NOT production ready! Heck, they aren't even BE
Which branch?
> On Feb 22, 2024, at 10:54 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> For bug 112829, I got graphics and charts to copy out of AOO in SVG format
> on FreeBSD and Windows (and probably Linux), but I wasn't able to test
> macOS. A quick look at the code shows we might need another patc
I mean, is there a branch with this already folded in?
> On Feb 22, 2024, at 2:27 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> Either trunk or AOO42X.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 7:11 PM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Which branch?
>>
>>> On Feb 22, 2024, at 10:54 AM,
hich has that patch I sent, because I am not sure it
> works yet.
>
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 8:07 PM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> I mean, is there a branch with this already folded in?
>>
>>> On Feb 22, 2024, at 2:27 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>>>
>
Dennis, thanks for opening up this conversation.
As noted over the last few months, it has become obvious to the
board that AOO has not been a healthy project for some time.
Again, there are many, many reasons for this, and it doesn't
help to go into them here and now. The simple fact is that we a
4:14 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>
>>
>> What is obvious is that the AOO project cannot support, at the present
>> time, being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not
>> being one, but instead being a framework or library that can be consumed
>> by act
BTW, can we drop private@ on this and simply continue the
discussion on dev@?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
f this scene from Pulp Fiction (apologies for
the language: I didn't write this. Blame "edgy" QT):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NlrgjgOHrw
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 9:43 AM, Roberto Galoppini
> wrote:
>
> On Sep 2, 2016 3:29 PM, "Jim Jagielski" wrot
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>
>> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
>
>> Patricia, we are still discussing. We are balancing reasons,
>> advantages
>> and disadvantages, for different solutions. There is no decision made.
>>
>> And more
iPhone
>
>> On Sep 2, 2016, at 6:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> On Sep 2, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
>>>
>>>> Patr
The issue, currently, is that the Mac OS X build requires, last I
checked, an extremely old version of OSX, Xcode, et.al. No one
has such a beast laying around.
I have tried creating a VMware Fusion guest but it is difficult
finding all the bits and pieces.
There was some discussion on (re)purcha
Well, not sure if it is *allowed* or not, but VMware Fusion specifically
allows for it. And it works.
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 1:11 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
>
> That's unfortunate. And Apple doesn't allow running OSX under a VM on
> another
> OS do they?
>
>
> Phil
>
>
> This message optimized
n the
above wiki page would be very, very useful.
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 7:10 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> The issue, currently, is that the Mac OS X build requires, last I
>> checked, an extremely old version of OSX, Xcode, et.al. No one
>>
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
>
> 3. Regarding Mac in particular, I'll repeat this question from an earlier
> thread: Does the ASF have Mac hardware for doing Mac builds, or are we
> dependent solely on developer machines for that?
>
Is there anyone following up w/ Infra
Thus makes me very, very sad. I hope that my comments are not
a factor here. As anyone who had been following the hacker-news
and LWN thread know, I am a supporter of AOO; I have been one
since the start despite the slings and arrows directed towards
me in being such.
There was no intent to malign
Please be aware that the board does not "stick its nose" into the
daily operations of a project. The current status of AOO came to
the boards attention via the required PMC reports as well as
other communications. It was only because of that that the board
got involved.
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 3:57
Super super news! Thx!!
> On Sep 3, 2016, at 4:49 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> hard times for OpenOffice, but no unsolvable problems if we stand together.
>
> We, the team to the ProOO-Box (www.prooo-box.org), want the whole community
> to assure that we will support a new release of
e at Apple that
> could help grant a special license from Apple?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Sep 3, 2016, at 10:03 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> Well, not sure if it is *allowed* or not, but VMware Fusion specifically
>> all
Cool... We should get rid of that old page or put DEPRECATED in big letters.
So have people built w/ 10.11 and Xcode 7.2.1 ?
> On Sep 3, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> According to
>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documen
I had an issue w/ epm and PackageMaker, which is hardcoded in
configure to live in /Developer/ Also some other nits...
Taking notes and will send patches in.
> On Sep 3, 2016, at 4:02 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 03:17:01PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote
s for a hardcoded path is beyond me. :)
> On Sep 3, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 05:20:08PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I had an issue w/ epm and PackageMaker, which is hardcoded in
>> configure to live in
It appears to me that what "we" should do is to create a blog
entry on blogs.a.o which provides more depth and detail in
this whole kerfluffle. It could contain WHY the original [DISCUSS]
thread was sent, that it was, in fact, a [DISCUSS] and basically
to initiate some *thought* and not any sort of
Not sure how this will come across... I am certain I will not
be fully understood about this, anyway, this question deserves an
answer.
What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
places, as well as contributing to the 2 main ones, is just how much
"damage" Rob Weir has e
gt;>> project, the current push for
>>> more developers etc. It could also explain ASF's focus on
>>> healthy communities,
>>> as an explanation for the [DISCUSS] thread, and the fact that
>>> an Apache project
>>> not longer able to produce
Fine then. I'll drop it. It did deserve to be brought up though.
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> On 06/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
>> places, as well as contributing t
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> Am 09/08/2016 12:38 AM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
>> I am volunteering to serve as release manager for 4.1.3. I may go on to
>> be RM for 4.2, but we can see about that later.
>>
>> My objective is to complete 4.1.3 in November. If I succeed ther
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner
> or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but with
> more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last month.
>
>
FWIW, I have built HEAD on
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410
on my MacPro. Organizing my notes and will update the wiki
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional comma
Note that the LWN article is protected under a subscriber
paywall.
I'd like to followup but I'm not going to pay to repeat
on that thread what I've said numerous times in numerous
locations :)
> On Sep 8, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
>
> https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/699755/533f8963
All done!! Thx!!
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
subj sez it all
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Already have one on Mwiki: same username.
> On Sep 8, 2016, at 6:13 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> subj sez it all
>
> Done. But if you are going to contribute build instructions/tips, you
> probably want the MWiki too. In that case, just supp
Even ignoring trolls is tiring work :)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> On Sep 9, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Simos Xenitellis
> wrote:
>
>
> LibreOffice has a list of big ideas, called "crazy ideas", at
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Crazy_Ideas
> These require big effort and it would be great if an office suite
> would implement them.
> Notable examp
ant.
> On Sep 9, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Jorg Schmidt wrote:
>
>> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
>
>>> LibreOffice has a list of big ideas, called "crazy ideas", at
>>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Crazy_Ideas
>>&g
Seeing that there is a dependency, still, on dmake, I've gone
ahead and created
https://github.com/jimjag/dmake
based on what I've been using... Suggestions and patches
welcome. Hoping we can use this to replace the apche-extras
links.
It's based on (https://github.com/mohawk2/dmake)
--
Didn't see this addressed so opened a new blocker:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127113
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:26 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> Please make sure all patches for 4.1.3 are checked in to the AOO413 branch.
>
> --
n 4.1.3 or in 4.1.4?
>
> 4.1.3 will not be able to move on to building and testing unless we cut off
> additions at some point. I think that point has already passed, but I'm open
> to arguments.
>
> On 9/14/2016 9:53 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Didn't see this
All other OSX 10.11 "blockers" can be worked around by
adding some depedencies (like openssl...) but this one
stops configure in its tracks.
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:03 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> 4.1.3 won't build on 10.11 w/o this since the Xcode provided just
building process, the
> sourceforge tarball seems to be working for me so far (it's my first build,
> and it's still building, but it's gotten past the initial dmake
> installation stage at least).
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 5:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Tarballs are at:
>> https://github.com/jimjag/dmake/releases
>> My goal was to try to combine all the flavors of dmake into one
>> "canonical" version we can use.
&g
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> epm is required and not under our control. In fact, epm 4.3 is out
> and work much better for AOO since it removes the need for the
> long-since deprecated PackageMaker app and instead uses the
> official pkgbu
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> That would be challenging but useful then. For epm, as Ariel already
> explained to you, we use a patched version so it's not a trivial task to
> replace it, but probably it's feasible.
>
It looks like most of the epm patch is not rel
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 15, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>
>> That would be challenging but useful then. For epm, as Ariel already
>> explained to you, we use a patched version so it's not a trivia
Here's what I have so far:
https://github.com/jimjag/epm/tree/aoo
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 15, 2016, at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 15, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrot
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
> wrote:
>
>
> Note that we could also update the AOO patch to make epm get rid of the
> PackageMaker, the patch already fixes the path:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/epm/epm-3.7.patch?revision=1413471&view=markup#l38
Any real reason to name it 4.2.0 ?
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 3:25 PM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
>
> I like this idea... 4.1.3 and 4.1.4 in the near-term, and then 4.2.0 in
> early 2017. Feels like a good rhythm to aim for.
>
> Phil
>
> On Sep 15, 2016 15:14, "Marcus" wrote:
>
>> Am 09/15/2016 05:44
no longer require --nodep.
Considering that the package/installer in solenv knows about
both patched and unpatched epms, I'd like us to consider baselining
epm 4.3 (unpatched) for 4.2.x and later... It would be nice to
be able to leverage untainted epm.
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 1:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wr
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Any real reason to name it 4.2.0 ?
>
> Two years of miscellaneous changes and fixes, a radically improved build
> system, unit tests at build time, updates of a lot of libraries, supp
I'm in the process of bringing up a new CentOS5 system as we speak.
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 4:48 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> Volunteers to do the building?
>
> I can help with linux-64 builds based on the information shared by Ariel
> about the existing setup of hi
Most excellent. Thx!!
> On Sep 17, 2016, at 7:50 AM, Gavin McDonald wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> For those wanting to follow along or assist in the ASF hosted Buildbot
> builds, I created a
> new wiki page with some info about the builds and their hosts, how to update,
> trigger builds etc.
>
> h
If useful, I can replace my 64bit CentOS5 vm with a 32bit one.
> On Sep 17, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> On 16/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I'm in the process of bringing up a new CentOS5 system as we speak
>
> Good news! The reci
Where is this documented? I can see the ./configure line in
the puppet files but we should also have this on a wiki someplace,
right?
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> I remember that old times at Sun where we have done builds with more than
> just en-US.
>
> In order to cover p
I'll set one up in the next day.
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 6:25 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> On 19/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> If useful, I can replace my 64bit CentOS5 vm with a 32bit one.
>
> It would be useful (to have more coverage) to test
> htt
Just a FYI that I now have 4 build VMs available that I will
use: OSX 10.11/Xcode 7.3.1, Ubuntu 14.04/64bit, CentOS5.11/64bit
and CentOS5.11/32bit.
So far, successful builds on OSX and the 64bit Ubuntu and CentOS5
VMs; haven't tried the 32bit one yet.
-
> On Oct 3, 2016, at 3:49 PM, Patricia Shanahan 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 release.
>>>
>>> A PMC member, to cast a binding +1 vot
Sorry for the delay: Building OSX as we speak.
A build the week-before-last had no regressions.
> On Sep 25, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> 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 per
Once built and tested, how does one upload? I'm assuming
the prepare-download-tree.sh in aoo-devtools??
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.o
> On Sep 27, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
> wrote:
>
>
> IMO providing different builds for same arch will make it difficult to
> QA, so I will go on with the Linux 64-bit builds. If someone wants to
> build on CentOS 5 32 bit and upload the binaries, please tell and do so.
>
Unl
I cannot recreate the bug on my setup, which is 10.11 with Java 7 and 8
installed.
> On Oct 5, 2016, at 5:40 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> 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 appro
+1 (binding)
source testing:
o Checked signature and hashes
o Checked source formats contain identical files.
o Built and tested en-US on OSX 10.11
binary testing:
o Tested en-US app on OSX 10.11, 10.10
> On Oct 5, 2016, at 5:07 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> The Apache Op
We should ensure that AOO people join the keysignings @ ApacheCon
> On Oct 8, 2016, at 9:08 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> This is not a blocker for the release (and moreover signature files are
> explicitly allowed to be updated during the release vote if needed), but I
> couldn't verify signa
> On Oct 9, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> I would like to see the old communication. Was the dev mailinglist
>> involved?
>
> Oh, sure! You can search for digital signatures on the dev list
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@openoffice.apache.org (I
> On Oct 10, 2016, at 2:03 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 9 October 2016 20:21:32 BST, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 10/09/2016 Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> On 9 September 2016 23:29:49 BST, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
> The infrastructure team has regained access to the OpenOffi
One of the things I'd like to work on in 4.2.x is some cleanups
of the build system; I know there's already a page on it
(https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Improvements)
but my main goals are to (1) better handle OSX/MacOS and
(2) get rid of the shell environment pollution required
(at
> On Oct 12, 2016, at 6:05 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> 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
Methinks that the creation of recruitment@ was ill-advised...
Most new people are joining dev@ which makes recruitment@ look
like a dismal failure.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional com
ur support
>>
>>
>> All the Best
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> On 11.10.2016 14:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2016 22:34, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 10, 2016, at 2:03
++1!
> On Nov 26, 2016, at 1:21 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> In february 2015 I stepped back from the OpenOffice PMC. I stepped backi
> because I have no more time to work on the project. Now I want to come back.
> Let me know, if this is ok or not.
>
> Regards Raphael
>
>
> --
Thx for the discussion and the work. It is greatly appreciated.
With that said, I still don't see the need or rationale for the
"##For Developers" section. Removing the last 2 paragraphs
would go a long way in keeping the narrative closer to the
kind of discussion and info that the ASF is known fo
Uggg
looks like breakage from the solenv port to gbuild???
Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/trunk/main/cppu/util
dmake: /Users/jim/src/asf/trunk/main/solenv/inc/target.mk: line 583:
Warning: -- Macro `SHL2TARGETN' redefined after use
dmake -P6 -f extra.mk
Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/trunk/m
Using svn-bisect to track down the issue...
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:03 PM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Uggg
>>
>> looks like breakage from the solenv port to gbuild???
>>
>>
> Ar
e.org/projects/openoffice/buildlogs/linux32/main/pyuno/unxlngi6.pro/misc/logs/prj.txt
> <>
> Maybe it is related?
> <>
> Regards, <>
> Matthias
> <>
> Am 11.02.19 um 20:56 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:03 PM Jim Jagielsk
in/solver/450/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/LinkTarget/Library/pyuno.so
> On Feb 12, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
> Please run:
> ls -l /Users/jim/src/asf/trunk/main/solver/450/
> unxmaccx.pro/workdir/LinkTarget/Library/*py*
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 8:08 PM Jim Jag
101 - 200 of 1170 matches
Mail list logo
