gbuild migration (Was: Re: Building module store error on macOS)

[Matthias Seidel]

Am 04.04.2018 um 15:06 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> On Apr 4, 2018, at 9:01 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>
>>
>> I will start another thread on the gbuild topic...
>>
> First and foremost, I am incredibly impressed with the work
> being done on the gbuild migration. I really am.
>
> However, and there's always a "however", there must come
> a time where we "hold the line" on migration in hopes of getting
> a 4.2.0 out. As such, I think some sort of plan might be due
> (and apologies if we have such a documented plan already
> in place)...

I don't know if there is already a plan, but what about voting for a
release manager and get the thing going?

Regards, Matthias

> Does it make sense to spend time to list modules that still
> need that migration and then prioritize them? As well as
> create a policy such that all "new and updated" modules
> must use gbuild but for existing modules, "if it ain't broke,
> don't fix it"?
>
> I'm not trying to stifle the migration, it's just that it appears
> to me that we need better management about it.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: gbuild migration (Was: Re: Building module store error on macOS)

[Damjan Jovanovic]

Thank you, I appreciate it.

The list of gbuild modules is in main/Module_ooo.mk. The rest are using
dmake. The next one I expect to port is main/jurt, and that will be a
substantial patch.

Will our release process keep testing trunk until it's ready, then make a
branch of it to use for the release?

If necessary I can work on modules offline or in another branch, then
commit or merge them back when the release is over.


On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

>
>
> > On Apr 4, 2018, at 9:01 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> >
> >
> > I will start another thread on the gbuild topic...
> >
>
> First and foremost, I am incredibly impressed with the work
> being done on the gbuild migration. I really am.
>
> However, and there's always a "however", there must come
> a time where we "hold the line" on migration in hopes of getting
> a 4.2.0 out. As such, I think some sort of plan might be due
> (and apologies if we have such a documented plan already
> in place)...
>
> Does it make sense to spend time to list modules that still
> need that migration and then prioritize them? As well as
> create a policy such that all "new and updated" modules
> must use gbuild but for existing modules, "if it ain't broke,
> don't fix it"?
>
> I'm not trying to stifle the migration, it's just that it appears
> to me that we need better management about it.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

gbuild migration (Was: Re: Building module store error on macOS)

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Apr 4, 2018, at 9:01 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> 
> I will start another thread on the gbuild topic...
> 

First and foremost, I am incredibly impressed with the work
being done on the gbuild migration. I really am.

However, and there's always a "however", there must come
a time where we "hold the line" on migration in hopes of getting
a 4.2.0 out. As such, I think some sort of plan might be due
(and apologies if we have such a documented plan already
in place)...

Does it make sense to spend time to list modules that still
need that migration and then prioritize them? As well as
create a policy such that all "new and updated" modules
must use gbuild but for existing modules, "if it ain't broke,
don't fix it"?

I'm not trying to stifle the migration, it's just that it appears
to me that we need better management about it.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org