Re: Request for PR reviews
Thank you Dave for the clarification. Dylan On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 9:28 PM Dave Fisher wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 2021, at 9:18 PM, Dylan Pham wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I think the wording on the Buildbot info page should be changed from > > "slaves" to something like "worker" or something like that in order to be > > culturally sensitive in this day and age. > > We will have to see if we can get this changed. It’s a Foundation resource > that uses other’s software. Please be patient and don’t take lack of change > as this project not being sensitive. Please keep in mind that we are > volunteers her. > > You should notice that OpenOffice is using “main” and “trunk” for the > default branch in our Git Repositories. We’ve made sure not to use “master”. > > Regards, > Dave > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Buildbot+info > > > > > > my 2c, > > Dylan > > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:39 AM Matthias Seidel < > matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Arrigo, > >> > >> Am 22.02.21 um 19:28 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > >>> Hello Matthias, > >>> > >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote: > >>> > Hi Arrigo, > > Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > > Dear All, > > > > please help me review and finalize PR 122: > > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 > > as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot > > other similar problems in the future. > > > > Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: > > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 > > because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I > > dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" > > change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the > > CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit > > included. > > > > I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's > > either on GitHub, or on this list. > Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. > They are a great tool and can really speed up things. > > I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test > against the (fixed) problem. > >>> That's very kind of you. And I did receive some comments from other > >>> people as well, that I appreciate. > >>> > >>> But can we establish a sort of ``emergency exit'' in the > >>> "commit-then-review" process, like ``if no-one comments a PR it could > >>> be merged in X time''? A sort of lazy consensus? > >> I am not sure, since I really can't evaluate the quality of the code > >> (old and new one). > >>> > >>> Personally, I would really like to see the development branches go > >>> "live" with nightly builds. I see lots of people available to report > >>> bugs and test fixes, and I cannot submit anything to them for testing, > >>> mostly because I cannot build Windows releases! > >> > >> Regarding Windows builds: > >> > >> We have nightly builds of trunk and weekly builds for AOO42X: > >> > >> https://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html > >> > >> And you can always find my personal Test Builds here: > >> > >> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/ > >> > >> If you are interested in building for Windows, I would be happy to help > >> you with it. > >> After all these years, I am still the only one that does release builds > >> for Windows and is able to sign them. Just for redundancy it would be > >> great to have a second person available. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Matthias > >> > >>> > >>> Thank you and best regards, > >> > >> > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
Re: Request for PR reviews
> On Feb 23, 2021, at 9:18 PM, Dylan Pham wrote: > > Hello, > > I think the wording on the Buildbot info page should be changed from > "slaves" to something like "worker" or something like that in order to be > culturally sensitive in this day and age. We will have to see if we can get this changed. It’s a Foundation resource that uses other’s software. Please be patient and don’t take lack of change as this project not being sensitive. Please keep in mind that we are volunteers her. You should notice that OpenOffice is using “main” and “trunk” for the default branch in our Git Repositories. We’ve made sure not to use “master”. Regards, Dave > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Buildbot+info > > > my 2c, > Dylan > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:39 AM Matthias Seidel > wrote: > >> Hi Arrigo, >> >> Am 22.02.21 um 19:28 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >>> Hello Matthias, >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> Hi Arrigo, Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > Dear All, > > please help me review and finalize PR 122: > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 > as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot > other similar problems in the future. > > Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 > because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I > dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" > change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the > CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit > included. > > I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's > either on GitHub, or on this list. Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. They are a great tool and can really speed up things. I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test against the (fixed) problem. >>> That's very kind of you. And I did receive some comments from other >>> people as well, that I appreciate. >>> >>> But can we establish a sort of ``emergency exit'' in the >>> "commit-then-review" process, like ``if no-one comments a PR it could >>> be merged in X time''? A sort of lazy consensus? >> I am not sure, since I really can't evaluate the quality of the code >> (old and new one). >>> >>> Personally, I would really like to see the development branches go >>> "live" with nightly builds. I see lots of people available to report >>> bugs and test fixes, and I cannot submit anything to them for testing, >>> mostly because I cannot build Windows releases! >> >> Regarding Windows builds: >> >> We have nightly builds of trunk and weekly builds for AOO42X: >> >> https://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html >> >> And you can always find my personal Test Builds here: >> >> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/ >> >> If you are interested in building for Windows, I would be happy to help >> you with it. >> After all these years, I am still the only one that does release builds >> for Windows and is able to sign them. Just for redundancy it would be >> great to have a second person available. >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >>> >>> Thank you and best regards, >> >> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Request for PR reviews
Hello, I think the wording on the Buildbot info page should be changed from "slaves" to something like "worker" or something like that in order to be culturally sensitive in this day and age. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Buildbot+info my 2c, Dylan On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:39 AM Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Arrigo, > > Am 22.02.21 um 19:28 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > > Hello Matthias, > > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote: > > > >> Hi Arrigo, > >> > >> Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > >>> Dear All, > >>> > >>> please help me review and finalize PR 122: > >>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 > >>> as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot > >>> other similar problems in the future. > >>> > >>> Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: > >>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 > >>> because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I > >>> dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" > >>> change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the > >>> CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit > >>> included. > >>> > >>> I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's > >>> either on GitHub, or on this list. > >> Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. > >> They are a great tool and can really speed up things. > >> > >> I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test > >> against the (fixed) problem. > > That's very kind of you. And I did receive some comments from other > > people as well, that I appreciate. > > > > But can we establish a sort of ``emergency exit'' in the > > "commit-then-review" process, like ``if no-one comments a PR it could > > be merged in X time''? A sort of lazy consensus? > I am not sure, since I really can't evaluate the quality of the code > (old and new one). > > > > Personally, I would really like to see the development branches go > > "live" with nightly builds. I see lots of people available to report > > bugs and test fixes, and I cannot submit anything to them for testing, > > mostly because I cannot build Windows releases! > > Regarding Windows builds: > > We have nightly builds of trunk and weekly builds for AOO42X: > > https://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html > > And you can always find my personal Test Builds here: > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/ > > If you are interested in building for Windows, I would be happy to help > you with it. > After all these years, I am still the only one that does release builds > for Windows and is able to sign them. Just for redundancy it would be > great to have a second person available. > > Regards, > >Matthias > > > > > Thank you and best regards, > >
Re: Request for PR reviews
I am sorry. I am just to slow at the moment.. I hope tonight I find time but I am not sure. It depends how stressful my working day is. Maybe we are to view that look at PRs. And do 4 eye principle. Am 22. Februar 2021 18:24:07 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel : >Hi Arrigo, > >Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >> Dear All, >> >> please help me review and finalize PR 122: >> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 >> as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot >> other similar problems in the future. >> >> Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: >> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 >> because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I >> dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" >> change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the >> CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit >> included. >> >> I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's >> either on GitHub, or on this list. > >Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. >They are a great tool and can really speed up things. > >I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test >against the (fixed) problem. >Commenting on code isn't something I can do... ;-) > >Regards, > > Matthias > >> >> Thank you in advance and best regards,
Re: Request for PR reviews
Hi Arrigo, Am 22.02.21 um 19:28 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > Hello Matthias, > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote: > >> Hi Arrigo, >> >> Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> please help me review and finalize PR 122: >>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 >>> as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot >>> other similar problems in the future. >>> >>> Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: >>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 >>> because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I >>> dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" >>> change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the >>> CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit >>> included. >>> >>> I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's >>> either on GitHub, or on this list. >> Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. >> They are a great tool and can really speed up things. >> >> I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test >> against the (fixed) problem. > That's very kind of you. And I did receive some comments from other > people as well, that I appreciate. > > But can we establish a sort of ``emergency exit'' in the > "commit-then-review" process, like ``if no-one comments a PR it could > be merged in X time''? A sort of lazy consensus? I am not sure, since I really can't evaluate the quality of the code (old and new one). > > Personally, I would really like to see the development branches go > "live" with nightly builds. I see lots of people available to report > bugs and test fixes, and I cannot submit anything to them for testing, > mostly because I cannot build Windows releases! Regarding Windows builds: We have nightly builds of trunk and weekly builds for AOO42X: https://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html And you can always find my personal Test Builds here: https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/ If you are interested in building for Windows, I would be happy to help you with it. After all these years, I am still the only one that does release builds for Windows and is able to sign them. Just for redundancy it would be great to have a second person available. Regards, Matthias > > Thank you and best regards, smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Request for PR reviews
Hello Matthias, On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Arrigo, > > Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > > Dear All, > > > > please help me review and finalize PR 122: > > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 > > as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot > > other similar problems in the future. > > > > Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: > > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 > > because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I > > dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" > > change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the > > CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit > > included. > > > > I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's > > either on GitHub, or on this list. > > Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. > They are a great tool and can really speed up things. > > I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test > against the (fixed) problem. That's very kind of you. And I did receive some comments from other people as well, that I appreciate. But can we establish a sort of ``emergency exit'' in the "commit-then-review" process, like ``if no-one comments a PR it could be merged in X time''? A sort of lazy consensus? Personally, I would really like to see the development branches go "live" with nightly builds. I see lots of people available to report bugs and test fixes, and I cannot submit anything to them for testing, mostly because I cannot build Windows releases! Thank you and best regards, -- Arrigo http://rigo.altervista.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Request for PR reviews
Hi Arrigo, Am 21.02.21 um 16:01 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: > Dear All, > > please help me review and finalize PR 122: > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/122 > as it should fix a top-priority AOO bug, and hopefully help us spot > other similar problems in the future. > > Moreover, I would really like to merge PR 111: > https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/111 > because I do work on openSUSE and I cannot build AOO without it. I > dare proposing it as a "Good Thing" for me, and a "Mostly Harmless" > change for anyone else. FWIW I could build 4.1.9 for Linux on the > CentOS 5 version in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with that commit > included. > > I'll be more than happy to answer anybody's concerns over both PR's > either on GitHub, or on this list. Yes, I am a bit puzzled that PRs are so neglected. They are a great tool and can really speed up things. I have merged some of your PRs, but only those I could build and test against the (fixed) problem. Commenting on code isn't something I can do... ;-) Regards, Matthias > > Thank you in advance and best regards, smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
