Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 12/6/12 11:00 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 04/12/2012 Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: What was the outcome of this thread? Is trunk in 4.0 mode? Andrea update to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/f8KoAQ suggests so (I may have missed some mail telling so). No formal mail was sent, but there was large consensus on 4.0, so we can assume the trunk to be in 4.0 mode. All recently integrated changes into http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ go in this direction too. that is my understanding as well, let us concentrate on AOO 4.0 Juergen
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 04/12/2012 Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: What was the outcome of this thread? Is trunk in 4.0 mode? Andrea update to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/f8KoAQ suggests so (I may have missed some mail telling so). No formal mail was sent, but there was large consensus on 4.0, so we can assume the trunk to be in 4.0 mode. All recently integrated changes into http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ go in this direction too. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
2012/12/5 Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 01:07:45PM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. What was the outcome of this thread? Is trunk in 4.0 mode? Andrea update to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/f8KoAQ suggests so (I may have missed some mail telling so). Ariel, My understanding from the discussion is that we are going to release 4.0 as the next release. I volunteer to help Juergen to consolidate the contents from previous project planning wiki of 3.5 as well as 4.0. - Shenfeng (Simon) Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Am Samstag, 24. November 2012 um 00:16 schrieb Kay Schenk: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. Here is what we currently have on the planning wiki as proposed for 4.0: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning Is it your/our intention to have these items complete for a proposed 4.0 release? I don't think so, proposing is one thing but implementing is the other. I for myself have to revert probably the extension manager enhancement. We have to rework this list. Juergen We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing these new languages together with 4.0. The question is if we do have the resources for releasing the new languages? Any opinions or feedback? Juergen -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/11/24 Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. Here is what we currently have on the planning wiki as proposed for 4.0: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning Is it your/our intention to have these items complete for a proposed 4.0 release? Kay, That's the 4.0 planning wiki we should continue to work on. But some items there were input long long ago (when we thought there would be a 3.5 in front...). So I suggest we should revisit the contents there. - Shenfeng (Simon) Simon -- Well yes we should. FYIW, I looked at the 3.5 planning doc as well. And, I couldn't determine really what from the 3.5. had already been implemented in trunk. I need to go over this. OK, I only bring up the cwiki page because this is what the public has been seeing and is referenced in the recent Call for Marketing Volunteers blog. . oops! sorry, meant to delete this partial sentence...please ignore it. Also, we might look again at the information that was colelcted via the Google We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing these new languages together with 4.0. The question is if we do have the resources for releasing the new languages? Any opinions or feedback? Juergen -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning. Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-) IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved to Apache either. -Rob Regards Keith
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:53:38 -0500 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning. Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-) IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved to Apache either. -Rob Regards Keith My preference would be that the User should be able to switch between the traditional interface and the new interface (whatever it mmight be) by setting some form of switch. I have no need or desire to learn a new interface just for the sake of having something trendy; I'm used to what is there and know my way around it. On the other hand, I understand that there is a stratum of Users who must have bells and whistles and skins and all sorts of horrible frills and colours. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:53:38 -0500 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning. Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-) IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved to Apache either. -Rob Regards Keith My preference would be that the User should be able to switch between the traditional interface and the new interface (whatever it mmight be) by setting some form of switch. I have no need or desire to learn a new interface just for the sake of having something trendy; I'm used to what is there and know my way around it. On the other hand, I understand that there is a stratum of Users who must have bells and whistles and skins and all sorts of horrible frills and colours. That's rather dismissive of UI changes that you have not seen yet. Some of us believe that the quality of the UI has a direct impact on how easy it is to use the product. Some of us believe that the current UI was not born in a state of absolute grace and perfection. We're not just trying to be trendy. We're not proposing horrible frills. We wouldn't waste our time on a fashion statement. If you have concrete concerns, then speak up. But please don't be insulting. -Rob -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 11/23/12 5:26 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning. Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-) Rob, have you ever been involved in direct user support? When you make major UI changes your support structure is going to be inundated with questions under the best of situations. When you spring them on users unawares you unleash the tirade of change for the sake of change potentially getting bad publicity for the product. While it is true that an amount of this is inevitable, a good marketing and communication campaign can go a long way towards minimizing it. We cannot loose sight of the act that we are an end user project and not just for the techie types. IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved to Apache either. Whether we have moved to Apache or not is of little concern to the general user. Changing the look and feel of the product he or she is familiar and comfortable with is. Do not get me wrong, I am not against change. I am simply adding a voice of caution that we not inadvertently shoot ourselves in the foot (figuratively to be sure). The UX work that Kevin and others are going and the push by you and others for greater marketing presence are all good things and need to be given sufficient time to have a good impact. If in the considered judgement of the community the March/April timeframe is sufficient that is great and we should do it. All I am doing is raising some considerations that may not always be thought of. Before we go in endless discussion here about UI changes I would recommend that people who are interested join the related discussion in time, give their input or raise their concerns. What I don't want to see is that people speak up when everything is implemented and final ;-) Now it's not the time to discuss it. We all agree that UI changes have to made careful and need intensive testing. We are trying to do our best, a good implementation, good testing and a smooth transition to the new UI. We are talking here about the sidebar where the main concept is already known from Symphony and where the interface was awarded already. We don't talk about something completely new and we will do it step by step. The toolbars will be still available and the sidebar can be hidden. The concept will evolve over time and I am very confident that our users will like it. Furthermore
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning. Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-) Rob, have you ever been involved in direct user support? When you make major UI changes your support structure is going to be inundated with questions under the best of situations. When you spring them on users unawares you unleash the tirade of change for the sake of change potentially getting bad publicity for the product. Actually, I was involved in direct user support for office smart suite. For several years I did direct phone support for users of Lotus SmartSuite, 40 calls per day. So I have actually done this, as a professional, thousands of times. And I was very good at it. Rob; That is why I asked the question was to get an answer. Since you have been involved in it you understand the issue and that is good. Also note that this was during the transition from DOS to Windows, so I know quite a bit about how users handle UI changes. Any changes we're proposing for AOO 4.0 are miniscule compared to the DOS to Windows transition. While it is true that an amount of this is inevitable, a good marketing and communication campaign can go a long way towards minimizing it. We cannot loose sight of the act that we are an end user project and not just for the techie types. Yes, marketing needs to accompany any user-visible changes, not just UI changes. But the need for marketing should be expressed as helping support our current call for marketing volunteers: https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/call_for_marketing_volunteers. It should not (IMHO) be expressed by denigrating the proposed UI changes. Regards, -Rob However I would like you to point me to anything in my post that could be considered denigrating a new UI. My concern was and still is that we have enough time to thoroughly test whatever changes are decided to be made and allow the marketing, ux and other ancillary parts to do there share also. I will support your call for volunteers in any way that I am able. I am nt a blogger so that is not an option for me. How ever I do and will continue to suggest to those I know who have needed skills that they seriously consider volunteering or the project. Regards Keith IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved to Apache either. Whether we have moved to Apache or not is of
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Am 11/22/2012 10:24 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): Am 11/22/2012 12:57 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Sorry, I've forgotten to mention that I like this time proposal. Marcus That sounds good. Should be enough time to implement and test new things. So, back to the question Next release 4.0 or not? ;-) Suggestion from me: - define within the next few weeks what features are for good for a 4.0 release - when we find only big things then implement them for 4.0 in March/April - when we see *additionally* enough smaller things, then a 3.5 could be done, too. Maybe until end of January? I assume the following is no problem and already agreed: - release new languages with 3.4.1 codebase - do a 3.4.x when we have serious issues that can/should not wait for the next bigger release Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. OK Marcus
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Am 11/23/2012 08:09 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Dave Fisher wrote: On Nov 22, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: No, if we name it 3.4.2 we imply it has something new in the English, German, Italian, ... version and communicating it would be unnecessary complex. If it is 3.4.1, it must be distributed as 3.4.1. Yes, but also distinct from the other 3.4.1 source release. Yes, the source package may be labeled differently (such as 3.4.1b), but the few new binaries we make available (e.g., Danish, Polish binary versions) should keep the 3.4.1 numbering. +1 for keeping the version number for the binary files. Marcus
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 11/21/12 10:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/21/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb jan iversen: On 21 November 2012 21:30, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. So do I. Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal Since we have no critical bugs in 3.4.1, I would keep using the 3.4.x series until 4.0 is available. If a security issue emerges that suggests we should make a new release, we will fix it and release 3.4.2; otherwise, I would just keep adding new languages to 3.4.1 and make a couple of 4.0-beta releases, to get better exposure and QA, rather than a 3.5 release. But the 3.4.x series must have some predictable schedule or this won't work. For example, I would propose the following: - We announce on ooo-l10n that 2 December is the first deadline for integration of new languages in 3.4.1 December 2 is very close, when I think of the work in progress on a number of languages, I would suggest end of the year. indeed very close and I will be offline for some further days next week. I count at least 3 languages Danish, Polish, Scots Gaelic. And when we increase the deadline until the end of the year we potentially get even more. - We integrate and build available new languages in the week after it (and we already have two, Danish and Polish) - Native-language teams do some QA - We approve/publish the new builds and the new source release (a 3.4.1 respin, rather than a 3.4.2, since this would confuse users) Would it not be more confusing to change the 3.4.1 distribution files ? I would warmly suggest only to release language packs, since they are separate and do NOT change the existing distribution. If I have understood it correct, only new full install and langpacks files will be distributed - or maybe only langpack files. both would be possible, I ma flexible here. For using the same download mechanism and no further special handling it would be helpful to have the same files as for all other langs. I don't think that it's needed to replace files except for the source files. Exactly, we would release the new languages only on base of 3.4.1 and a new src release. When we do a further 3.4.2 release we can build the new languages in the same way as the others. Juergen
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. Juergen
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Nov 22, 2012, at 3:50 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 10:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/21/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb jan iversen: On 21 November 2012 21:30, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. So do I. Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal Since we have no critical bugs in 3.4.1, I would keep using the 3.4.x series until 4.0 is available. If a security issue emerges that suggests we should make a new release, we will fix it and release 3.4.2; otherwise, I would just keep adding new languages to 3.4.1 and make a couple of 4.0-beta releases, to get better exposure and QA, rather than a 3.5 release. But the 3.4.x series must have some predictable schedule or this won't work. For example, I would propose the following: - We announce on ooo-l10n that 2 December is the first deadline for integration of new languages in 3.4.1 December 2 is very close, when I think of the work in progress on a number of languages, I would suggest end of the year. indeed very close and I will be offline for some further days next week. I count at least 3 languages Danish, Polish, Scots Gaelic. And when we increase the deadline until the end of the year we potentially get even more. - We integrate and build available new languages in the week after it (and we already have two, Danish and Polish) - Native-language teams do some QA - We approve/publish the new builds and the new source release (a 3.4.1 respin, rather than a 3.4.2, since this would confuse users) Would it not be more confusing to change the 3.4.1 distribution files ? I would warmly suggest only to release language packs, since they are separate and do NOT change the existing distribution. If I have understood it correct, only new full install and langpacks files will be distributed - or maybe only langpack files. both would be possible, I ma flexible here. For using the same download mechanism and no further special handling it would be helpful to have the same files as for all other langs. I don't think that it's needed to replace files except for the source files. Exactly, we would release the new languages only on base of 3.4.1 and a new src release. When we do a further 3.4.2 release we can build the new languages in the same way as the others. I think that we will need a new source release - we could call the source release 3.4.1b. It would give us good practice at voting on a release based on simple IP scans with RAT and svn diff to prove that the only changes are language files. We trust, but we must verify. I don't have any strong opinions regarding whether we hurry for a 3.5 or develop a feature rich and well tested 4.0. Once we reach consensus on this issue we should have Marketing publish the plan so the user base will know what to expect with an estimated timeline - emphasis on estimated. Regards, Dave Juergen
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Nov 22, 2012, at 3:50 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 10:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/21/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb jan iversen: On 21 November 2012 21:30, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: Jürgen Schmidt wrote: I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. So do I. Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal Since we have no critical bugs in 3.4.1, I would keep using the 3.4.x series until 4.0 is available. If a security issue emerges that suggests we should make a new release, we will fix it and release 3.4.2; otherwise, I would just keep adding new languages to 3.4.1 and make a couple of 4.0-beta releases, to get better exposure and QA, rather than a 3.5 release. But the 3.4.x series must have some predictable schedule or this won't work. For example, I would propose the following: - We announce on ooo-l10n that 2 December is the first deadline for integration of new languages in 3.4.1 December 2 is very close, when I think of the work in progress on a number of languages, I would suggest end of the year. indeed very close and I will be offline for some further days next week. I count at least 3 languages Danish, Polish, Scots Gaelic. And when we increase the deadline until the end of the year we potentially get even more. - We integrate and build available new languages in the week after it (and we already have two, Danish and Polish) - Native-language teams do some QA - We approve/publish the new builds and the new source release (a 3.4.1 respin, rather than a 3.4.2, since this would confuse users) Would it not be more confusing to change the 3.4.1 distribution files ? I would warmly suggest only to release language packs, since they are separate and do NOT change the existing distribution. If I have understood it correct, only new full install and langpacks files will be distributed - or maybe only langpack files. both would be possible, I ma flexible here. For using the same download mechanism and no further special handling it would be helpful to have the same files as for all other langs. I don't think that it's needed to replace files except for the source files. Exactly, we would release the new languages only on base of 3.4.1 and a new src release. When we do a further 3.4.2 release we can build the new languages in the same way as the others. I think that we will need a new source release - we could call the source release 3.4.1b. It depends on what is in the source release. If the tarball contains only the newly added PO translation files, then it could be called 3.4.1 without any confusion. Let's avoid any code changes, since that merely complicates future upgrades. It would give us good practice at voting on a release based on simple IP scans with RAT and svn diff to prove that the only changes are language files. We trust, but we must verify. If the only thing included in the source tarball are PO files then the proof is rather simple, yes? Just include the PO files, the LICENSE and NOTICE and a README that says to unzip these files over the already released full 3.4.1 source tarball. RAT scan of the PO files should be easy enough (assuming it understands PO files). Otherwise we can manually inspect the files for license headers. I don't have any strong opinions regarding whether we hurry for a 3.5 or develop a feature rich and well tested 4.0. Once we reach consensus on this issue we should have Marketing publish the plan so the user base will know what to expect with an estimated timeline - emphasis on estimated. Regards, Dave Juergen
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Am 11/22/2012 12:57 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of March or April we will have more time. That sounds good. Should be enough time to implement and test new things. So, back to the question Next release 4.0 or not? ;-) Suggestion from me: - define within the next few weeks what features are for good for a 4.0 release - when we find only big things then implement them for 4.0 in March/April - when we see *additionally* enough smaller things, then a 3.5 could be done, too. Maybe until end of January? I assume the following is no problem and already agreed: - release new languages with 3.4.1 codebase - do a 3.4.x when we have serious issues that can/should not wait for the next bigger release Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the next release. OK Marcus
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 22/11/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 10:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/21/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb jan iversen: On 21 November 2012 21:30, Andrea Pescetti wrote: I would propose the following: - We announce on ooo-l10n that 2 December is the first deadline for integration of new languages in 3.4.1 December 2 is very close ... indeed very close and I will be offline for some further days next week. I count at least 3 languages Danish, Polish, Scots Gaelic. I we have 3 languages ready I wouldn't wait much longer. I mean, if we reach the point where we can automate it enough (we have to, at least for the 3.4.x series), then we can respin 3.4.1 even on a monthly basis. If it is too much work then we have an infrastructural problem to solve. Of course, since most of this work is on you, Ariel and mirrors I would perfectly accept to shift the date forward if you believe it's better; but communicating a clear deadline and releasing a few new languages soon would prove that we are ready to do these releases without too much overhead, and that volunteers can test their work without waiting for months. Marcus (OOo) wrote: When we release new languages I think it's worth enough to name it 3.4.2. No, if we name it 3.4.2 we imply it has something new in the English, German, Italian, ... version and communicating it would be unnecessary complex. If it is 3.4.1, it must be distributed as 3.4.1. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Nov 22, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 22/11/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/21/12 10:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/21/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb jan iversen: On 21 November 2012 21:30, Andrea Pescetti wrote: I would propose the following: - We announce on ooo-l10n that 2 December is the first deadline for integration of new languages in 3.4.1 December 2 is very close ... indeed very close and I will be offline for some further days next week. I count at least 3 languages Danish, Polish, Scots Gaelic. I we have 3 languages ready I wouldn't wait much longer. I mean, if we reach the point where we can automate it enough (we have to, at least for the 3.4.x series), then we can respin 3.4.1 even on a monthly basis. If it is too much work then we have an infrastructural problem to solve. We will still need to VOTE as it will be a source release. That is not automatic. Of course, since most of this work is on you, Ariel and mirrors I would perfectly accept to shift the date forward if you believe it's better; but communicating a clear deadline and releasing a few new languages soon would prove that we are ready to do these releases without too much overhead, and that volunteers can test their work without waiting for months. Marcus (OOo) wrote: When we release new languages I think it's worth enough to name it 3.4.2. No, if we name it 3.4.2 we imply it has something new in the English, German, Italian, ... version and communicating it would be unnecessary complex. If it is 3.4.1, it must be distributed as 3.4.1. Yes, but also distinct from the other 3.4.1 source release. Regards, Dave Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. We have released 3.4.1 in August 2012, so a good time for a next release would be February 2013. That release would get a lot of bug fixes and new languages, but no new features. Remembering the difficulties doing releases around December/January I think, it cannot be earlier. But it should not be later either for to get the valuable language work as soon as possible. I don't think we have the QA capacity to do a full release in February. I'm trying to build up that team with more volunteers, but I'd be concerned that with current levels we could not both do a February release and do the preparatory work we need to do to write up test cases for a bigger 4.0 release. IMHO the new languages are more critical. We don't have any critical bug fixes in the trunk (that I know of). So I wonder if another solution is to release additional languages on the 3.4.1 branch? That kind of mini-release would not require as much retesting, since the code would not change. -Rob Making larger changes which justify a new major release means at the same time, we have to say something about end of life of the 3.x series. We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. I do not think, that a good tested release with such changes would be possible before July. Therefore I argue for not merging the planning, but release a 3.5 based on the current trunk (approximately) and then a version 4.0 containing large changes in autumn 2013. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Setting a feature freeze day? Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing these new languages together with 4.0. The question is if we do have the resources for releasing the new languages? Any opinions or feedback? So my suggestion is to not make 4.0 the next release but do a 3.5 release with bug fixes and further languages in between. Kind regards Regina
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On 11/21/12 4:22 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. We have released 3.4.1 in August 2012, so a good time for a next release would be February 2013. That release would get a lot of bug fixes and new languages, but no new features. Remembering the difficulties doing releases around December/January I think, it cannot be earlier. But it should not be later either for to get the valuable language work as soon as possible. I don't think we have the QA capacity to do a full release in February. I'm trying to build up that team with more volunteers, but I'd be concerned that with current levels we could not both do a February release and do the preparatory work we need to do to write up test cases for a bigger 4.0 release. IMHO the new languages are more critical. We don't have any critical bug fixes in the trunk (that I know of). So I wonder if another solution is to release additional languages on the 3.4.1 branch? That kind of mini-release would not require as much retesting, since the code would not change. that was part of my post. Having the new translations released on base of 3.4.1. I don't completely disagree to the argumentation of Regina but I believe we should skip a 3.5 and should concentrate on the next bigger release. We can of course change the plan when we get serious bug report and security fixes. We will keep trunk stable and bigger changes should be done on a branch anyway. We have already discussed to drop binfilter and a 4.0 would be the correct version for this drop. Juergen -Rob Making larger changes which justify a new major release means at the same time, we have to say something about end of life of the 3.x series. We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. I do not think, that a good tested release with such changes would be possible before July. Therefore I argue for not merging the planning, but release a 3.5 based on the current trunk (approximately) and then a version 4.0 containing large changes in autumn 2013. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Setting a feature freeze day? Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing these new languages together with 4.0. The question is if we do have the resources for releasing the new languages? Any opinions or feedback? So my suggestion is to not make 4.0 the next release but do a 3.5
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. We have released 3.4.1 in August 2012, so a good time for a next release would be February 2013. That release would get a lot of bug fixes and new languages, but no new features. Remembering the difficulties doing releases around December/January I think, it cannot be earlier. But it should not be later either for to get the valuable language work as soon as possible. This proposal makes more sense to me and appears to be a good compromise. It builds on the work that has been done to fix bugs and it also gets out much needed and judging by the response for translators, much wanted new languages. Making larger changes which justify a new major release means at the same time, we have to say something about end of life of the 3.x series. By releasing a 3.5 it gives us an opportunity to prepare our end users that the 3.x series is coming to end of life and that the next release will have some exciting changes. Let us not forget that often the success of major changes to a mature product such as AOO are as much do to good marketing as they are to the hard work of developers and testers. We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. I do not think, that a good tested release with such changes would be possible before July. Therefore I argue for not merging the planning, but release a 3.5 based on the current trunk (approximately) and then a version 4.0 containing large changes in autumn 2013. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Setting a feature freeze day? Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing these new languages together with 4.0. The question is if we do have the resources for releasing the new languages? Any opinions or feedback? So my suggestion is to not make 4.0 the next release but do a 3.5 release with bug fixes and further languages in between. +1 to Regina's proposal to do a 3.5 rather than try to jump straight into 4.0 Regards Keith Kind regards Regina
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob We have released 3.4.1 in August 2012, so a good time for a next release would be February 2013. That release would get a lot of bug fixes and new languages, but no new features. Remembering the difficulties doing releases around December/January I think, it cannot be earlier. But it should not be later either for to get the valuable language work as soon as possible. This proposal makes more sense to me and appears to be a good compromise. It builds on the work that has been done to fix bugs and it also gets out much needed and judging by the response for translators, much wanted new languages. Making larger changes which justify a new major release means at the same time, we have to say something about end of life of the 3.x series. By releasing a 3.5 it gives us an opportunity to prepare our end users that the 3.x series is coming to end of life and that the next release will have some exciting changes. Let us not forget that often the success of major changes to a mature product such as AOO are as much do to good marketing as they are to the hard work of developers and testers. We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. I do not think, that a good tested release with such changes would be possible before July. Therefore I argue for not merging the planning, but release a 3.5 based on the current trunk (approximately) and then a version 4.0 containing large changes in autumn 2013. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Setting a feature freeze day? Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The effort should be minimal as long as we don't integrate bugfixes. On the other hand a release is of course a lot of work and we can focus on releasing
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for our next release if it's ok for our community. +1 +1 on that from me also Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be. After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and also at the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a 4.0 version as our next release. I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have listed below would justify a version 4.0. But I doubt, that they are possible in a time frame, I see for the next release. I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a comfortable bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak out of the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves. Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for 4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to own testing and release management for 3.5. -Rob As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering for a 4.0 release Juergan? Regards Keith We have released 3.4.1 in August 2012, so a good time for a next release would be February 2013. That release would get a lot of bug fixes and new languages, but no new features. Remembering the difficulties doing releases around December/January I think, it cannot be earlier. But it should not be later either for to get the valuable language work as soon as possible. This proposal makes more sense to me and appears to be a good compromise. It builds on the work that has been done to fix bugs and it also gets out much needed and judging by the response for translators, much wanted new languages. Making larger changes which justify a new major release means at the same time, we have to say something about end of life of the 3.x series. By releasing a 3.5 it gives us an opportunity to prepare our end users that the 3.x series is coming to end of life and that the next release will have some exciting changes. Let us not forget that often the success of major changes to a mature product such as AOO are as much do to good marketing as they are to the hard work of developers and testers. We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. I noticed some discussion around a new visual design and a bigger rebranding and this is a further reason for a major release. I think it is time to define this more concrete and focus in more detail on the work that is needed and required to bring a good and stable release on the road. Our goal should be to continue the success of 3.4 and 3.4.1. If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. I do not think, that a good tested release with such changes would be possible before July. Therefore I argue for not merging the planning, but release a 3.5 based on the current trunk (approximately) and then a version 4.0 containing large changes in autumn 2013. I believe it is important that we concentrate on our next release. If you think a rebranding is important and you want to drive it, please start immediately. If you want to bring in some new features, please communicate it on the list and start working on it. Let us work on the plan for the next release in an open and transparent way. Setting a feature freeze day? Besides the next major release we should also continue the discussion on further language packs based on 3.4.1 to make the latest translations available as soon as possible. One way to make these language packs available would be to integrate the new translations on the AOO34 branch, build the language packs and a new source release based on this revision. The
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Hi Regina, On 21.11.2012 15:32, Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, ---snip--- We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. ---snip--- If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. These will need some more time (1/2 a year I guess roughly), so these will not be in a next release in Feb/march 2013. They indeed need deep testing, anything else would be too dangerous. Thus, these changeas are independent from the name for the next release. ---snip-- Sincerely, Armin -- ALG
Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:35:56 +0100 Armin Le Grand armin.le.gr...@me.com wrote: Hi Regina, On 21.11.2012 15:32, Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Jürgen, ---snip--- We are planning some bigger UI changes for the next release (sidebar) and such UI changes are always a good indicator for a new major release to signal our users bigger changers. I know Ariel has also some incompatible changes regarding add-ons in the pipeline that would also fit in a major release. Not to forget the internal changes in Draw. ---snip--- If nobody will complain I will start to merge the started 3.5 and 4.0 planning into one combined planning later. The changes are so large, that they need a lot of testing. The printing dialog has been the last large UI change and that has last over a year. Even when I only take the test time, which is reflected in Bugzilla, I see eight months CWS printerpullpages. The internal changes in Draw are not visible, but because they effect the whole office, they need a lot of testing too. These will need some more time (1/2 a year I guess roughly), so these will not be in a next release in Feb/march 2013. They indeed need deep testing, anything else would be too dangerous. Thus, these changeas are independent from the name for the next release. ---snip-- If there is a major User Interface change in AOO 4.0, whether this is User selectable (best option in my view) or installed without offering any option to revert to the traditional interface, it will need much more testing and perhaps even more rigorous testing than for a normal 0.1 release. Any instability in it will severely prejudice Users' confidence in AOO 4.0. I prefer therefore an interim 3.4.2 or 3.5 release, adding extra languages and some new functionality, such as the zapper for corrupt User Profiles, targetted for release early in 2013 to maintain a semblance of a six monthly release cycle. Of course I will accept the group decision, but the above is my thinking based on knowledge of relatively inexperienced posters on the en-Forum. Other Forum Volunteers and Moderators subscribed to this list may have other ideas. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie
