Re: Monteray MacOS build and Python

2022-09-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
Just because Apple doesn't ship it, doesn't mean it's not available. You can still download it via MacPorts or Homebrew. > On Sep 5, 2022, at 9:07 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 10:36 AM Bidouille > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Since MacOS 12.3,

Re: source release with MacOSx build.log

2022-08-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 (patches welcome) > On Aug 28, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Andrea, > > Am 28.08.22 um 23:20 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: >> On 27/08/22 Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> Am 23.08.22 um 23:53 schrieb Peter Kovacs: I found a note that we package the build log (which is 20

Re: [CLOSED] Vote Passed: (Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA)

2022-07-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
idel: >> Hi all, >> >> The Windows binaries were signed and re-uploaded. >> >> I created the staged dir on SourceForge and rsynced all binaries. >> >> Regards, >> >>Matthias >> >> Am 16.07.22 um 15:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski: &g

[CLOSED] Vote Passed: (Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA)

2022-07-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
The polls are closed; the VOTE PASSES. Thx to all who voted and tested. > On Jul 5, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA. > > These a

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jul 5, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dis

Re: [Discuss] Vote on Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
This has been the case for years. Recall that the binary builds are community convenience packages. > On Jul 10, 2022, at 4:51 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: > > Hi All, > > Checking the signature on the windows binaries I get Matthias's signature and > not Jim's (the Release Manager). > The policy

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.13-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ] yes

Re: [CLOSED] [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
i Jim, >> >> Am 26.04.22 um 15:24 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> I was hoping for more testing and feedback, but we have rec'd the necessary >>> number of >>> binding votes, and so this VOTE PASSES. >> Yes, I also hoped for more... >> >> Howe

[CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
I was hoping for more testing and feedback, but we have rec'd the necessary number of binding votes, and so this VOTE PASSES. > On Apr 13, 2022, at 9:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache Op

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll keep this open for a few more days to allow for more testing and voting... > On Apr 21, 2022, at 1:36 AM, Don Lewis wrote: > > On 13 Apr, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community >> builds of >> Apache

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 > On Apr 13, 2022, at 9:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dis

Re: Building 4.1.12-RC1 Linux x86

2022-04-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
The source of truth on how we build the community packages are the build script and the config.log file, which shows exactly what packages, features, and libraries are included. Have you ensured that all the packages from

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ] yes

Re: 4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-04-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll start work on an RC1 this week. RC1 will be based on 60e0a1c111c55ed3416146f0d2a848c993474018 > On Apr 7, 2022, at 5:21 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 05.04.22 um 14:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Are we ready for a RC1? > > So, basically on

Re: 4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-04-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Are we ready for a RC1? > On Mar 27, 2022, at 9:44 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 25.03.22 um 13:24 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> ... Are available at >> >> http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ > > Thanks! > > I tested

4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-03-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
... Are available at http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ Assuming these look good, we can progress to an RC1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: AOO 4.1.12 patches

2022-03-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
OK, i'll do a quick test build of HEAD on CentOS5 64-and-32 and we'll see if we are ready to rock and roll. > On Mar 22, 2022, at 8:09 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 22.03.22 um 11:33 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Other than >> >> >

AOO 4.1.12 patches

2022-03-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
Other than https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?list_id=244111_format=advanced=FIXED=FIXED_WITHOUT_CODE_milestone=4.1.12 What other patches are we looking at? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: AOO 4.1.12?

2022-03-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thanks! I volunteer to RM. Is that OK? > On Mar 15, 2022, at 6:43 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Just FYI, I created a Release Schedule for AOO 4.1.12: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.12 > > Feel free to update! > > Regards, > >Matthias >

Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
The en-US version of a dev/test of AOO 4.1.12 can be found here: http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
If everyone is in agreement, I'll create a macOS and Linux test/dev build of AOO41X HEAD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Feb 10, 2022, at 1:13 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Pedro, > > Am 10.02.22 um 18:16 schrieb Pedro Lino: >> Hi Matthias, all >> >>> On 02/10/2022 4:29 PM Matthias Seidel wrote: >> >>> I think Jim has Java 7 available, since we always built AOO41X with it. >> Is there any reason

Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
That's right... I'll wait to even try compiling until things settle down and we have some slowly moving target I can compile and build against. > On Feb 8, 2022, at 6:06 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Arrigo, > > No need to apologize. ;-) > > But I think, before we begin to think

Re: unfortunately I have to say goodbye to the AOO project

2022-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
++1! > On Dec 30, 2021, at 5:23 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 06:13:50 +0100, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> unfortunately I have to say goodbye to the AOO project, the reasons are >> family related. >> >> I would like to thank everyone involved in AOO

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
I wonder if maybe we should also consider dropping OpenSSL for LibreSSL - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 17, 2021, at 7:36 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: > > Hi Arrigo, > > On 11/17/21 2:16 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> I pushed a new branch "serf", that contains the OpenSSL upgrade >> commits (I reverted the reverts ;-) plus a tentative upgrade of the >> serf library to

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'm gonna look into the serf->(lib)curl option... Since we don't use any of the fancy features of serf, I'm thinking that the easy option might be best - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 11, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > > > I still think we should work on 2. somehow. For AOO42X and above, I agree. It's a lot of work for AOO41X simply because of the additional requirements for the old build systems.

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Nov 11, 2021, at 8:46 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 11.11.21 um 14:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> According to the serf mailing list, there are issues, at least with the test >> suite. >> >> Can someone confirm that AOO42X/trunk do NOT ha

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 11, 2021, at 7:35 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: > > Hello Jim, All, > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 01:19:16PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf >> is upgraded to support 1.1 > > Sorry... do yo

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 10, 2021, at 1:33 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 10.11.21 um 19:30 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> We could, but they are worse at releases than we are :-P > > A problem that needs to be fixed... ;-) > > BTW: I think you reverted one of my commi

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
We could, but they are worse at releases than we are :-P > On Nov 10, 2021, at 1:24 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 10.11.21 um 19:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf is >> upgraded to support 1.1 >

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf is upgraded to support 1.1 > On Nov 10, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 10.11.21 um 18:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Ugg ugg and double ugg >> >> We seem to be stuck

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
Ugg ugg and double ugg We seem to be stuck in a chicken-and-egg situation. Do we *really* need OpenSSL 1.1? Because even the latest release of serf doesn't really support that. What is the issue w/ using OpenSSL 1.0.2 that is driving us to OpenSSL 1.1? PS: OpenSSL is universally, IMO,

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
Jim, > > Am 09.11.21 um 21:50 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I've recently folded in openssl-1.1 to trunk and all branches, but this gets >> us in a corner. >> >> To support this version of openssl, we need to upgrade Serf. This means that >> we need to

Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've recently folded in openssl-1.1 to trunk and all branches, but this gets us in a corner. To support this version of openssl, we need to upgrade Serf. This means that we need to also update apr and apr-util as well as include a requirement that the build server also as SCons installed. This

Re: macOS Monterey

2021-10-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Agreed > On Oct 26, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Pedro Lino > wrote: > > Hi Matthias > > People who bought the M1 are those who want to have "the latest" so if they > are about to upgrade, AOO should be ahead. > My opinion is yes. > In any case people with an M1 Apple are probably 0,0001% of AOO

Re: Compatibility of new releases with older operating systems

2021-10-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
For Linux it's hard, because it depends on so many factors, such as kernel version, libc versions, etc... Also, you can build a stripped down version on older platforms that lack new libraries, or build against a new OS and include all the bells and whistles. The best we've been able to come up

[CLOSED] Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
The vote on releasing AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA is CLOSED. The vote has PASSED. > On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:01 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 04.10.21 um 13:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Agreed! > > Marcus already casted his vote. > > Maybe i

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Sep 30, 2021, at 6:37 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dis

Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
gt; > > > Am 30.09.21 um 12:37 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community >> builds of >> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA. >> [...] >> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs. > > >

Re: Future - Digital Signatures

2021-09-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Sep 29, 2021, at 4:25 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > > >> On Sep 29, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Arrigo Marchiori >> wrote: >> >> Hello Dave, All, >> >> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 03:35:30PM -0700, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >>> Hi Pedro, >>> >>> I think that AOO42X and Trunk need to improve in three

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-09-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ]

Re: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
exxAndJava.(RexxAndJava.java:880) > at > org.rexxla.bsf.engines.rexx.RexxEngine.initialize(RexxEngine.java:291) > at org.apache.bsf.BSFManager$8.run(BSFManager.java:854) > at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) > at org.apache.

Re: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
The macOS, Linux64 and Linux32 builds are also there! > On Sep 23, 2021, at 9:48 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have uploaded all Windows binaries to: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/binaries/ > > Although we have not yet announced AOO

Re: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
If HEAD of the branch is ready, then I'm all for an RC1. Once I hear definitively, I'll start the Linux and macOS builds > On Sep 17, 2021, at 5:27 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Yes > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 17, 2021, at 2:09 AM, Pedro Lino >> wrote: >> >> Hi Matthias >> On

Re: macOS Digital Signature Setup for AOO

2021-09-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
The issue is that for AOO 4.1.x we must use an out-of-date version of Xcode. With 4.2.0 and beyond, we use later versions of Xcode (and the SDK) that fully support the Apple requirements. > On Sep 10, 2021, at 4:07 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > I think our setup for macOS digital

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

2021-08-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
I believe the fix, which is universal, is already folded into the repos > On Aug 25, 2021, at 5:43 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Am 06.08.21 um 12:26 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >> Hello Jim, All, >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 05, 202

Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
And the macOS, Linux64 and Linux32 bit builds can be found at: https://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.1.11-test/ Cheers! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands,

Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
HEAD on origin/AOO41X? > On Aug 19, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 19.08.21 um 15:56 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Should I do macOS and Linux ones as well? > > I think that would be great! > > Regards, > >Matth

Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
Should I do macOS and Linux ones as well? > On Aug 19, 2021, at 7:06 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just uploaded new AOO4111 Test Builds for Windows: > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-4111-Test/ > > Feedback is welcome! > > Regards, > >Matthias > >

Re: devtools

2021-08-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
Any other opinions or comments? > On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:52 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > To me, it being within OpenOffice.git makes the most sense... but I'm fine > either way ;) > >> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Within /Apache/Op

Availability of Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0-Dev3(m3) developer test builds

2021-08-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
be found at: o https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/ Thank you! -- Jim Jagielski, on behalf of the AOO PMC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands

Re: AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
the Apache server? > > Matthias > > Am 06.08.21 um 16:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> >>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Matthias Seidel >>> wrote: >>> >>> That's c9282f5c5c ? >> Yep. That's right! >>> Building for Windows now

Re: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
The Crash Report indicates that it is the Check For Updates function that causes the problem. Some weirdness with serf and SSL certs. libnss3 -> libsmime -> libnssutil3 -> libplds4 > On Aug 6, 2021, at 6:04 PM, Bouschen, Michael > wrote: > >

Re: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you try this version: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/de/Apache_OpenOffice_Dev_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_de.dmg > On Aug 6, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Michael Bouschen wrote: > > Hi, > > I just updated my system to macOS 11.5.1 and reinstalled OpenOffice

Re: svn commit: r49231 - /dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am uploading both the regular and the ./Dev/ builds... just in case there is something in the Dev builds themselves which causes issues > On Aug 6, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Sorry, these are NOT Dev builds, compare to Dev2: > >

Re: devtools

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
ed. > > Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would >> be nice, I think, to use on version

Re: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'm not getting that crash, even after scrolling thru the doc, resizing the window, etc... > On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Michael Bouschen wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > thanks for trying. > > I also see this window, but after a few more seconds OpenOffice crashes. > I figured out OpenOffice up to

devtools

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would be nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for all our code related repos. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Aug 6, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > That's c9282f5c5c ? Yep. That's right! > > Building for Windows now. Might take some time, since I can do only > single threaded build with Cygwin 3.2.0. > Yikes!

AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I have tagged AOO420-Dev3-m3 and am working on the builds. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I think I will tag tomorrow morning and start some builds :-) > On Aug 3, 2021, at 12:48 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Ready, when you are! ;-) > > Am 03.08.21 um 18:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I'd like to spend some time on the ODS bug on macOS: >>

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

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >