On 9 August 2013 09:17, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/8/13 4:33 PM, janI wrote:
On 8 August 2013 15:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We
janI wrote:
Apache 4.x is available (and now even faster) for continued work by all
translators
Perfect. So we settled on Apache OpenOffice 4.x as descriptive name,
with aoo40 as machine name. This is actually very good, so links will
be preserved.
If anybody want to work on a language
On 8/7/13 8:44 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 16:44, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7
On 8 August 2013 08:06, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 8:44 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 16:44, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen
On 8/8/13 10:15 AM, janI wrote:
On 8 August 2013 08:06, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 8:44 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 16:44, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7
On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have to convert them all in po, merge
against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
place/project and use new languages on demand
No problem, I would have preferred another way, but this is less work
On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have to convert them all in po, merge
against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
place/project and use new languages on demand
No problem, I would have
On 8 August 2013 15:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have to convert them all in po, merge
against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is important that we don't fall in the release and forget trap,
i.e., this bug was already known when 4.0 was released, so
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is important that we don't fall in the release
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is important that we
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org
On 7 August 2013 13:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42
On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI
On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen
On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
On 7
On 6 August 2013 06:51, O.Felka olaf-openoff...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 05.08.2013 23:34, schrieb David Gerard:
On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
When I consider what I hear in the real world, I would prefer a fast
release, solving the most important issues. We always have the
Rob Weir wrote:
a 4.0.1 release in the next few weeks to address the specific
high-urgency issues? [...]
Good plan. I'm adding some remarks below, to see the release not only
from the users point of view, but from the community perspective too.
3) Use the release blocker flag to propose
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Rob Weir wrote:
a 4.0.1 release in the next few weeks to address the specific
high-urgency issues? [...]
Good plan. I'm adding some remarks below, to see the release not
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is important that we don't fall in the release and forget trap,
i.e., this bug was already known when 4.0 was released, so it doesn't
need to be evaluated again for 4.0.1. At least, we should re-evaluate
the old proposed
On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is important that we don't fall in the release and forget trap,
i.e., this bug was already known when 4.0 was released, so it doesn't
need to be evaluated
It looks like some regressions slipped through into AOO 4.0.0, and I'd
hate to wait until 4.1 to see them fixed. So I wonder if we can aim
for a 4.0.1 release in the next few weeks to address the specific
high-urgency issues? We could also use this opportunity to roll in
whatever new
Top posting.
+1.
The quality of 4.0 is beyond what we used to see in the past. There are many
users rather disappointed in the forum, especially Calc users. Many have to
downgrade.
The sooner we correct that, the better, especially if we can do that before
September.
Hagar
Le 05/08/2013
Am 08/05/2013 08:16 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
It looks like some regressions slipped through into AOO 4.0.0, and I'd
hate to wait until 4.1 to see them fixed. So I wonder if we can aim
for a 4.0.1 release in the next few weeks to address the specific
high-urgency issues? We could also use this
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
Am 08/05/2013 08:16 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
It looks like some regressions slipped through into AOO 4.0.0, and I'd
hate to wait until 4.1 to see them fixed. So I wonder if we can aim
for a 4.0.1 release in the next few
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
It looks like some regressions slipped through into AOO 4.0.0, and I'd
hate to wait until 4.1 to see them fixed. So I wonder if we can aim
for a 4.0.1 release in the next few weeks to address the specific
high-urgency
On 5 August 2013 21:55, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
Am 08/05/2013 08:16 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
It looks like some regressions slipped through into AOO 4.0.0, and I'd
hate to wait until 4.1 to see them fixed.
On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
When I consider what I hear in the real world, I would prefer a fast
release, solving the most important issues. We always have the possibility
to make a 4.02 if really needed.
x.0.x releases monthly are the way to go. I think LibreOffice
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:34 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
When I consider what I hear in the real world, I would prefer a fast
release, solving the most important issues. We always have the possibility
to make a 4.02 if really
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:34 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
When I consider what I hear in the real world, I would prefer a fast
release, solving the most
Am 05.08.2013 23:34, schrieb David Gerard:
On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
When I consider what I hear in the real world, I would prefer a fast
release, solving the most important issues. We always have the possibility
to make a 4.02 if really needed.
x.0.x releases
32 matches
Mail list logo
