Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Never mind that one: This one is the one: THX! diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx index dc67c5dc58..fc75fa9cb9 100644 --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx @@ -131,9

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you try this: diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx index dc67c5dc58..fc75fa9cb9 100644 --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx @@ -131,9 +131,10 @@ inline sal_Bool

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx index dc67c5dc58..8ea41ec95f 100644 --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx @@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Aug 4, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello Jim, > > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 08:09:11AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >>> On Aug 4, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Arrigo Marchiori >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Jim, >>> &g

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Aug 4, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello Jim, > > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:39:14AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works? >> >> diff --git a/main/comphelper/i

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works? diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx index dc67c5dc58..97c4d080f4 100644 --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx +++

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
It does... > On Aug 3, 2021, at 1:25 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 03.08.21 um 19:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Thanks... but that seems based on some older version of AOO41X... or am I >> missing something? > > Yes, we had this problem

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thanks... but that seems based on some older version of AOO41X... or am I missing something? > On Aug 3, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 03.08.21 um 18:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Wow. This is weird, but also kind of makes sense since it

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm... this seems to indicate that it is something in the UNO code itself which may be the issue, and specifically about exception handling... possibly some weirdness in the assembly part. That narrows things down... great work Arrigo!

Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Next weekend? Any idea? >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> Am 29.07.21 um 15:21 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Am 27.07.21 um 19:11 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >>>>> Hello All, >>>&

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Wow. This is weird, but also kind of makes sense since it seems so very, very platform and SDK sensitive. Someone remind me what the catalina branch is and how it relates to trunk and AOO42X, please :-) > On Jul 27, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello All, > > resurrecting

Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-07-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Snapshot works for me > On Jul 23, 2021, at 10:43 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 16.07.21 um 13:39 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I'm ready for a dev3... > > That's great! > > Are there any patches in the pipeline or do we want to do a

Re: catalina branch waiting for reviews [Was: [Mini] Setup of development environment]

2021-07-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jul 19, 2021, at 10:26 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > People need macOS builds more frequently to test. > Agreed. But every time I seem to encourage a test macOS build, it seems that people want to hold off...

Re: catalina branch waiting for reviews

2021-07-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
I thought that more recent systems were what the 4.2.x... branch was for. > On Jul 19, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Arrigo Marchiori > wrote: > > Hello Jim, > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 10:14:03AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> What is wrong w/ using the build stuff

Re: catalina branch waiting for reviews [Was: [Mini] Setup of development environment]

2021-07-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
What is wrong w/ using the build stuff that we have used for years? > On Jul 18, 2021, at 9:00 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Dear All, > > On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 03:27:54PM +0200, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> I just committed the "catalina" branch: >>

Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-07-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
sis for refreshed code and translations. >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> >>>> Keith >>>> >>>>> Am 23.03.21 um 16:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>> >>>>>>

What to focus on next

2021-05-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On May 21, 2021, at 5:02 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 14.05.21 um 18:56 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> On May 14, 2021, at 1:27 AM, Arrigo Marchiori >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I agree, but how many 4.1.X versi

Re: [OS/2] saving ODS with chart

2021-05-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On May 27, 2021, at 5:11 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Yuri, > > Am 27.05.21 um 10:54 schrieb Yuri Dario: >> Hi Matthias, >> Ideas on where to look? >>> Maybe Jim knows, since we had such an issue in the mac build 4.1.9(?) >> a rebuild fixed the issue for MacOS (issue 128426),

Re: Hyperlink Warning Message

2021-05-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On May 14, 2021, at 1:27 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > > I agree, but how many 4.1.X versions do we want to publish before 4.2.0? > Now that we support two digits, please let us not point to 4.1.99 ! ;-) > FWIW, I tend to agree. We fixed the bug. Maybe its not the best solution, but I

Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Done > On May 11, 2021, at 1:53 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Will do... > >> On May 10, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Marcus wrote: >> >> Am 06.05.21 um 15:50 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Am 06.05.21 um 15:08 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>> Once we tag

Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Will do... > On May 10, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 06.05.21 um 15:50 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Am 06.05.21 um 15:08 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> Once we tag HEAD of AOO41X to AOO4110 >> Can't wait! ;-) >> I have dozens of commits to be backport

Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Once we tag HEAD of AOO41X to AOO4110 > On May 6, 2021, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Just a pragmatic question: > > When do we want to start working on AOO 4.1.11? > > The sooner we branch it, the sooner we can do Test builds and let people > see if their problem is

Re: [Bugzilla] Increase Linux baseline to CentOS 6

2021-05-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
As noted elsewhere, I use CentOS7 for our 4.2.X/trunk Linux 64 bit builds. > On May 1, 2021, at 5:35 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127513 > > Should this Issue not be adjusted? > > > All the best > > Peter > > -- > This is the Way!

Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
All AOO 4.1.10 artifacts have been uploaded to both the ASF's release repo as well as SF. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
on-route... > On Apr 29, 2021, at 2:44 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 29.04.21 um 20:38 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Still waiting on 4.1.10 to show up on >> https://archive.ap

Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Still waiting on 4.1.10 to show up on https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thx! > On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:43 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Everything is uploaded now! > > FYI: I already created a staged dir at SourceForge. > > Matthias > > Am 29.04.21 um 17:36 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Thanks! Once done

Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Am 29.04.21 um 14:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> The VOTE on the release of AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA has CLOSED. >> >> The VOTE has PASSED: AOO 4.1.10-RC2 (git hash b1cdbd2c1b) will be released >> as AOO 4.1.10 GA >> >>> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Ji

[CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
The VOTE on the release of AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA has CLOSED. The VOTE has PASSED: AOO 4.1.10-RC2 (git hash b1cdbd2c1b) will be released as AOO 4.1.10 GA > On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Well... it takes *time* to do the release, since there are uploads, and sync, etc... > On Apr 28, 2021, at 1:12 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 28.04.21 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> The VOTE is scheduled to close today... anyone opposed if I keep it open for >>

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
The VOTE is scheduled to close today... anyone opposed if I keep it open for another 24-48 hours? > On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dis

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ]

Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
Before we call a vote, I'd like to ask as many people as possible to give the 2nd release candidate of AOO 4.1.10 a good, solid test. The source files and complimentary community builds for this RC can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/ Cheers!

Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
Jim, > > Am 20.04.21 um 18:28 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Yeah... I'm fixing as we speak. > > Thanks! > > Linux (x64) builds are OK. > >> >>> On Apr 20, 2021, at 11:27 AM, Matthias Seidel >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jim, >>> &g

Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
... > > Matthias > > Am 20.04.21 um 17:01 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Hi Jim, >> >> Windows binaries are also uploaded now, I think we are complete! >> >> Matthias >> >> Am 19.04.21 um 19:26 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> git hash:

Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
git hash: b1cdbd2c1b0c99b9e8c2ff5f17cc0127551a8f62 > On Apr 19, 2021, at 1:16 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Since we did kinda do a RC1, at least it was up on the dev dist site, I think > we should call this RC2. I'll make the updates and then start the macOS and > Linux build

Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
ow? Time to branch off AOO4110 and make > a Release Candidate! > > Then we can bump up AOO41X, so we can merge Carl's Test fixes. > > Regards, > >Matthias > > Am 14.04.21 um 01:42 schrieb Carl Marcum: >> Hi Jim, >> >> This time to the lis

Re: Request for reviewers: PR 126

2021-04-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
Approved and merged... sorry for the delay > On Apr 16, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: > > Hi Arrigo, > > On 4/16/21 12:36 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> PR 126 [1] is about the "About" dialog (sorry for the word play :-). >> >> It fixes an invalid display of the build

Re: Code execution in Apache OpenOffice via non-http(s) schemes in Hyperlinks

2021-04-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
In prep for 4.1.10 (and our 1st release candidate), we're using https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.10 for tracking. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional

AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of AOO. I am proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next week. I am currently building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for HEAD of AOO41X - To

Re: [openoffice] branch AOO41X created (now 5610821)

2021-03-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Mar 29, 2021, at 3:53 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Is this the new 4.1.x development branch? > > Should I commit to it and we branch off 4.1.10 later? +1 > > Matthias > > Am 29.03.21 um 17:40 schrieb j...@apache.org: >> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git

Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-03-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
In an effort to save some time and resources, can we confirm on whether or not we are building the full language set? > On Mar 20, 2021, at 2:04 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have created the directory structure for Dev3: > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint text for macOS

2021-03-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
ve Fisher <mailto:w...@apache.org> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2021 9:51 AM >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:dev@openoffice.apache.org> >>>> <mailto:dev@openoffice.apache.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint

Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint text for macOS

2021-03-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
I don't understand the question. We just have 1 offering for Mac users... so what kind of hint text would we need? > On Mar 8, 2021, at 9:28 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Really no mac user interested?! > > Regards, > >Matthias > > Am 05.03.21 um 20:58 schrieb Marcus: >> Am 10.01.21

Bugz: 128426

2021-02-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
The above issue (https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128426) is closed for 4.1.x but it seems to crop back up with the various 4.2.x builds on macOS. Of particular interest is that what "fixed" the bug back when we were handling 4.1.9 RCs was that the bug occurred when built using a later

Re: Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Carl, on what platform? TIA. > On Feb 11, 2021, at 6:26 AM, Carl Marcum wrote: > > On 2/9/21 6:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: >> On 2/8/21 8:54 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: >>> On 2/8/21 7:15 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: >>>> Hi Jim, >>>> >>>>

Re: Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
For me, the issue seemed to be this code chunk in scripting/java/build.xml Previously, the java.version was 1.7 which made trying to build break when using Java8 on the mac. Since the above edit, all proceeds fine. No doubt, there is a more

Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
Anyone tried building HEAD of AOO42X w/ Java8 (or later) and Apache Ant 1.10? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: How to cope with duplicate attributes in XML tags

2021-02-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Funny that you bring this up... I'm been tracking down some bugs and they all seem to be XML related... fastsax->libwriterfilter with occasional cores due to __cxa_call_unexpected. I feel that making AOO more fragile by trying to work around cases where invalid and/or non-compliant XML is

[CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-02-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
It looks like there are more than the required 3 +1 binding votes. This vote PASSES. I will start the required uploading > On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:47 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of > macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1

Re: [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
FTR: +1 from me. > On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:47 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of > macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128415 as well, maybe... > On Jan 28, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of >> macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. > &

[VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/ This vote overrides the previous vote due to some regressions noted in the

Re: ext_libraries/apr-util module

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
> I'm using Xcode 12.3 > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:24 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Which version of Xcode? >> >>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 5:48 PM, Dylan Pham wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm building trunk/450 on macos

Re: ext_libraries/apr-util module

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Which version of Xcode? > On Jan 27, 2021, at 5:48 PM, Dylan Pham wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm building trunk/450 on macos big sur and got an error below: > > Makefile:50: /Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/ext_libraries/apr-util/ > unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/apr-util-1.6.1/build/rules.mk: No such

Re: Test fix for M1 Big Sur

2021-01-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
The upcoming 4.1.9 release fixes it and we will likely be releasing a 4.2.0-Dev3 in a few weeks. > On Jan 22, 2021, at 10:28 AM, Scott B wrote: > > I would be interested in testing the 4.2 version that fixes the crash in Big > Sur. > > Thanks, > Scott Bergren >

[CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
After 96hrs, I've closed this vote, which PASSES with plenty of (binding) +1 votes. Thanks to all! I will start the actual release process asap. > On Jan 18, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community

Re: macOS Big Sur configure issue: clang errors

2021-01-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
My guess is that you do not have SDKROOT defined in your environment. Before running configure make sure you do: export SDKROOT=$(xcrun --sdk macosx --show-sdk-path) > On Jan 20, 2021, at 6:09 PM, Dylan Pham wrote: > > So I ran below: > > ./configure \ >--enable-verbose \ >

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
My VOTE: [X] yes / +1 [X] binding (member of PMC) [X] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ macOS 10.15, CentOS5 ] [X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ macOS 10.15, macOS 11.1, CentOS5, Ubuntu 18.04 ] > On Jan 18, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ]

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

2021-01-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 13, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > > I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb +1

Re: pi 4 port update

2021-01-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
This is weird. You say you are trying to build 4.1.9 but the solver version is 4.5.0 (trunk). Are you *SURE* you're on the AOO419 branch? > On Jan 12, 2021, at 12:12 PM, marcia wilbur wrote: > > So, > Here's the error... > make: *** No rule to make target >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
The macOS and Linux community builds have been re-verified and uploaded. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
ny problems... > What problems should have been detected? > > Regards, > Pedro > >> On 01/11/2021 1:50 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> >> I have discovered an issue w/ the Linux and macOS builds. It is NOT >> a problem w/ the code. As a result, I am removi

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
I have discovered an issue w/ the Linux and macOS builds. It is NOT a problem w/ the code. As a result, I am removing these builds and will rebuild them. > On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:14 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > The Apache OpenOffice PMC is happy to announce the immediate ava

[ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
The Apache OpenOffice PMC is happy to announce the immediate availability for testing and review of the 1st Release Candidate for Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9. Pre-built community convenience binaries can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/ With

Re: Got an Apple Developer ID, next week testsigning 4.1.6

2021-01-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, we have been signing releases since we've obtained the ID years ago > On Jan 9, 2021, at 7:09 AM, Bidouille wrote: > > > Bump this thread > This was still actuality? > And could be apply to next 4.1.9 > A real enhancement for end users > > - Mail original - >> De: "Peter Kovacs"

Fwd: [openoffice] annotated tag AOO419-RC1 created (now a53baa6)

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository. > > jim pushed a change to annotated tag AOO419-RC1 > in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice.git. > > > at a53baa6 (tag) > tagging 561082130aec836ff9c7626c642cf3c44fbec11f (commit) > repl

Re: Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, that is the current hash. > On Jan 8, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 08.01.21 um 13:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> By COB today (Friday the 8th) I plan on tagging HEAD of AOO419 as AOO419-RC1 >> so we can start builds

Re: Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
By COB today (Friday the 8th) I plan on tagging HEAD of AOO419 as AOO419-RC1 so we can start builds over the weekend from that tag. > On Jan 6, 2021, at 3:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Matthias and I will be starting our AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds over > the weekend for testing by the s

Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info - bug 127952

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
This seems like a safe and non-controversial fix to me... > On Jan 7, 2021, at 4:31 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello, > > On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 07:03:19AM -0800, Don Lewis wrote: > >> On 6 Jan, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> >>

Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Matthias and I will be starting our AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds over the weekend for testing by the start of next week, hopefully. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info - bug 127952

2021-01-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 6, 2021, at 9:19 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello All, > > > - My own build of trunk on Linux can open the file. > > Do you think that this is worth more investigation before releasing > 4.1.9? > AFAICT, it is not a regression (trunk and 4.1.x are very different)... So I

Re: Whre is the _actuell_ test-Build

2021-01-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
https://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/Dev/ Note, these are unofficial Dev snapshot builds. > On Jan 6, 2021, at 2:37 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > Hello, > > I had just promised Dave to link the latest test build of AOO 4.1.9 for MacOS > in the forum. > > Can someone please give me the

Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 5, 2021, at 7:51 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 05.01.21 um 13:29 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Should we try for a RC1 early next week? > > I didn't hear any response regarding this issue yet: > > https://bz.apache.org/

Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Should we try for a RC1 early next week? > On Dec 27, 2020, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > The AOO419 branch has been created. > The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped. > The Release Status page has been cloned: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/

Re: Linux virtual machines for release builds

2021-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Works for me... > On Jan 4, 2021, at 3:20 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello Marcus, > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 05:57:56PM +0100, Marcus wrote: > >> Am 04.01.21 um 16:27 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >>> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:03:35PM +0100, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: >>> first of all,

Copyright updates

2021-01-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
Just a reminder that as we update files within the AOO repo, we should also take the opportunity to update the copyright dates on said files to 2021... There is no need to wholesale update the copyright on *all* files in bulk, just as we modify them... Cheers, and Happy 2021!

Re: [openoffice] branch trunk updated: 'fakeroot' is no longer optional, but required, when making deb/dpkg so no need to worry about the old hack and seeing if we have fakeroot.

2021-01-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Followed up on the bugz ticket... > On Jan 3, 2021, at 9:16 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > One user has a problem with this commit, see: > > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128422 > > Could you have a look? > > Regards, > >Matthias > >

Re: Linux virtual machines for release builds

2021-01-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 2, 2021, at 9:12 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Dear All, > > the wiki page "Step by step building guides for different platforms" > [1] mentions: > > - CentOS 5 for AOO 4.1.x > and lists the commands to prepare a x86_64 VM; > > - CentOS 7 for AOO 4.2.x > but it also states

Re: My last advance notice regarding Big Sur (was: What we should do now)

2020-12-31 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Dec 31, 2020, at 5:06 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > > Although it was clear to everyone here that the issue needs a quick solution, > and although there were many discussion posts and a lot of hard work in > revising the blogpost, nothing relevant has happened yet. Are you crazy? Did

Re: Test of AOO-dev 4.19

2020-12-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
5674a7e9f73/main/solenv/inc/minor.mk#L23 > > Regards, > >Matthias > > Am 30.12.20 um 12:37 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Hmmm. Scanning both trunk and AOO419 for 'GailWindow', I'm not seeing any >> code level diffs between the 2. >> >> I wonder if it's r

Re: Test of AOO-dev 4.19

2020-12-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm. Scanning both trunk and AOO419 for 'GailWindow', I'm not seeing any code level diffs between the 2. I wonder if it's related to this: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/commits-list/2011-July/msg00596.html > On Dec 30, 2020, at 5:43 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > > > Starting 4.19 in a

Re: Language subsets

2020-12-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've uploaded macOS, Linux32 and Linux64 bit Dev test builds to: http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Language subsets

2020-12-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Works for me... Any other feedback? > On Dec 29, 2020, at 6:31 AM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 29.12.20 um 11:40 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> It's been suggested that before we do an actual RC1, it might >> be a Good Idea to have a Developer's Test Build of all platforms >>

Language subsets

2020-12-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
It's been suggested that before we do an actual RC1, it might be a Good Idea to have a Developer's Test Build of all platforms available for a quick pre-test. That makes a LOT of sense. It doesn't seem like we need the full language set though for these but instead maybe just 3-5. How about:

Re: Proposed change for download page

2020-12-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
https://www.openoffice.org/download/ also refers to OS X <=10.6 versions, which we do not provide. That should be removed as well, IMO. > On Dec 28, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > Hello, > > there was currently in the forum the case of a user who believed AOO was also > available

Re: [Consensus Building] What we should do now (was: [lazy consensus] ... Big Sur)

2020-12-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
ter Kovacs wrote: > > > On 28.12.20 13:17, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Playing devil's advocate here: does it make sense to actually post a blog >> article about this and then, maybe a week later, have the article >> moot with the actual release? > > Yes I think it i

Re: [Consensus Building] What we should do now (was: [lazy consensus] ... Big Sur)

2020-12-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Playing devil's advocate here: does it make sense to actually post a blog article about this and then, maybe a week later, have the article moot with the actual release? Maybe it is better to address the issue with the release announcement...? > On Dec 27, 2020, at 1:26 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >

AOO 4.1.9 Info

2020-12-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
The AOO419 branch has been created. The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped. The Release Status page has been cloned: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.9 - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [openoffice] branch AOO419 updated: Force SDK 10.11 at most Pass NULL, not -1 (!!)

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
BUGZ seems to be a build issue, not a code one, but it still needs to be fixed and noted, likely with some autoconf checks that fakeroot exists. > On Dec 26, 2020, at 3:43 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 26.12.20 um 20:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> So

Re: [openoffice] branch AOO419 updated: Force SDK 10.11 at most Pass NULL, not -1 (!!)

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
ell wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:43:06 +0100 > Matthias Seidel <mailto:matthias.sei...@hamburg.de>> wrote: > >> Hi Jim, >> >> Am 26.12.20 um 20:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> So there is for sure a bug in AOO41X, but why it on

Re: [openoffice] branch AOO419 updated: Force SDK 10.11 at most Pass NULL, not -1 (!!)

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
So there is for sure a bug in AOO41X, but why it only seems to affect macOS BigSur is unknown. It is this: > diff --git a/main/bridges/source/cpp_uno/shared/vtablefactory.cxx > b/main/bridges/source/cpp_uno/shared/vtablefactory.cxx > index f4d6c56..2ca9b8f 100644 > ---

Big Sur 4.1.x core dumps

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've confirmed that my 4.2.0 builds work fine on BigSur but the 4.1.8 builds, even using Xcode10 and the 10.13SDK still result in core on macOS11. Below you'll find the stack. My initial thoughts are that it is NOT a build issue, but rather a code one, so I'll start some investigation with that

Re: How should we proceed with BigSur? (was: Does AOO 4.1.8 run under macOS Big Sur?)

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
is that 4.2.0-dev works fine under Big Sur. With that in mind, over the next week I may try building 4.1.8 but with various versions of Xcode and macOS SDKs... > On Dec 26, 2020, at 10:05 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 26.12.20 um 15:17 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>

Re: How should we proceed with BigSur? (was: Does AOO 4.1.8 run under macOS Big Sur?)

2020-12-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
It is more than likely that we may need to release a 4.1.9 just to accommodate BigSur. However, AOO is hardly unique in being an app that no longer works when someone upgrades to BigSur. The macOS community is replete w/ such apps. I'm not using that as an excuse, but that is what it is. > On

Re: Apple Dumping Intel.

2020-12-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, all this is very similar when Apple moved from the PowerPC to Intel, many many moons ago. In fact, there was a time when you could have *3* versions: x86 32bit, PowerPC, and x86-64 64bit, all in 1 single bundle/binary. > On Dec 23, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Steve,

Re: Security vulnerabilities in AOO?

2020-12-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
Many years ago I worked at RedHat and asked that RedHat allow that all contributions be dual-licensed. All people then at RedHat involved in LO adamantly refused. Even the CTO at the time refused to get involved. > On Dec 23, 2020, at 5:37 AM, Bidouille wrote: > > Thanks Peter for this POV. >

Extension manager cores

2020-12-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
So I've been able to grab some it's running AOO in the console related to the extension manager problems: % /Applications/OpenOffice.app/Contents/MacOS/soffice 2020-12-22 11:08:56.613 soffice[52135:431101] WARNING: NSWindow drag regions should only be invalidated on the Main Thread! This will

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >