Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Marcus]

Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.

So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?

I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.

So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
(after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
start on 4.1.4-RC5


\o/ great choice. :-)

Thanks a lot for this. You have my support.

Marcus


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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Peter kovacs]

Jim, you are the Boss! :)
It is good you stay Release Manager! I appreciate that a lot!

Am 11. Oktober 2017 18:27:55 MESZ schrieb Kay Schenk :
>
>On 10/11/2017 05:46 AM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> 
>>> On October 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM Jim Jagielski 
>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
>>> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
>>> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>> 
>> +1
>
>my +1 also!
>
>> 
>>> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
>>> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
>>> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
>>> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>> 
>> Thank you for reconsidering and for staying as RM!
>> Looking forward to test 4.1.4 RC5 under Windows 7 and 10 as soon as
>it is available.
>
>yes! Thanks Jim.
>
>> 
>> Pedro
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Kay Schenk]

On 10/11/2017 05:46 AM, Pedro Lino wrote:



On October 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:


After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.


+1


my +1 also!




So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
(after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
start on 4.1.4-RC5


Thank you for reconsidering and for staying as RM!
Looking forward to test 4.1.4 RC5 under Windows 7 and 10 as soon as it is 
available.


yes! Thanks Jim.



Pedro

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



--
--
MzK

"Only the truth will save you now."
  -- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Jim Jagielski]

Path: .
Working Copy Root Path: /Users/jim/src/asf/code/follow/aoo-414
URL: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO414
Relative URL: ^/openoffice/branches/AOO414
Repository Root: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf
Repository UUID: 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
Revision: 1811822
Node Kind: directory
Schedule: normal
Last Changed Author: jim
Last Changed Rev: 1811817
Last Changed Date: 2017-10-11 08:11:42 -0400 (Wed, 11 Oct 2017)


> On Oct 11, 2017, at 9:10 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Jim,
> 
> can you give a short hint when you start building RC5 and the revision#?
> 
> Matthias
> 
> 
> Am 11.10.2017 um 14:02 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Lets go ahead and add those. Add the flag and request them and I'll review
>> and likely approve; at least we will doc them ;)
>> 
>> Thx!
>>> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:50 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
 Are these requested as 4.1.4 blockers in Bugz?
>>> No.
>>> 
> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> If time permits, could you have a look at:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538
> 
> Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.
> 
> Regards, Matthias
> 
> P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5
> 
> 
> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
>> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
>> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>> 
>> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
>> 
>> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
>> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>> 
>> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
>> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
>> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
>> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
>>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Matthias Seidel]

Jim,

can you give a short hint when you start building RC5 and the revision#?

Matthias


Am 11.10.2017 um 14:02 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Lets go ahead and add those. Add the flag and request them and I'll review
> and likely approve; at least we will doc them ;)
>
> Thx!
>> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:50 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Are these requested as 4.1.4 blockers in Bugz?
>> No.
>>
 On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
 wrote:

 Hi Jim,

 If time permits, could you have a look at:

 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538

 Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.

 Regards, Matthias

 P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5


 Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>
> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
>
> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>
> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Jim Jagielski]

I am starting on macOS and Linux-64 builds for 4.1.4-RC5 as we speak.

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 07:20:53 -0400
Jim Jagielski  wrote:

> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
> 
> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
> 
> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
> 
> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
> start on 4.1.4-RC5
> 

I think this is the best solution.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Pedro Lino]

> On October 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> 
> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.

+1

> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
> start on 4.1.4-RC5

Thank you for reconsidering and for staying as RM!
Looking forward to test 4.1.4 RC5 under Windows 7 and 10 as soon as it is 
available.

Pedro

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Jim Jagielski]

Lets go ahead and add those. Add the flag and request them and I'll review
and likely approve; at least we will doc them ;)

Thx!
> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:50 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Are these requested as 4.1.4 blockers in Bugz?
> 
> No.
> 
>>> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> If time permits, could you have a look at:
>>> 
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538
>>> 
>>> Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.
>>> 
>>> Regards, Matthias
>>> 
>>> P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
 After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
 the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
 one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
 
 So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
 
 I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
 and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
 
 So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
 to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
 (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
 start on 4.1.4-RC5
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
>>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 


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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Matthias Seidel]

Am 11.10.2017 um 13:47 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
>> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
>> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
>> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
>> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>
> Wise choice. I totally agree. This clearly supersedes my earlier
> proposal of a 4.1.4 followed by 4.1.5 next month.
>
> I would be for a quick RC5, ignoring all other issues. Vote could even
> start in less than 24 hours, if build/upload is fast.

Timing is good on my side, as I have a day of today... ;-)
But upload could take some time for Windows files.
(For the next release I plan to get a faster connection)

Regards, Matthias

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




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Matthias Seidel]

Am 11.10.2017 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Are these requested as 4.1.4 blockers in Bugz?

No.

>> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> If time permits, could you have a look at:
>>
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538
>>
>> Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.
>>
>> Regards, Matthias
>>
>> P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5
>>
>>
>> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
>>> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
>>> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>>>
>>> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
>>>
>>> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
>>> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>>>
>>> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
>>> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
>>> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
>>> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Jim Jagielski]

Are these requested as 4.1.4 blockers in Bugz?
> On Oct 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> If time permits, could you have a look at:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538
> 
> Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.
> 
> Regards, Matthias
> 
> P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5
> 
> 
> Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
>> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
>> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>> 
>> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
>> 
>> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
>> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>> 
>> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
>> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
>> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
>> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 


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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Andrea Pescetti]

Jim Jagielski wrote:

I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
(after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
start on 4.1.4-RC5


Wise choice. I totally agree. This clearly supersedes my earlier 
proposal of a 4.1.4 followed by 4.1.5 next month.


I would be for a quick RC5, ignoring all other issues. Vote could even 
start in less than 24 hours, if build/upload is fast.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Re: Resolution re: 4.1.4 and 4.1.5

[Matthias Seidel]

Hi Jim,

If time permits, could you have a look at:

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127141
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127538

Only small translation fixes, but they didn't make it into 4.1.4.

Regards, Matthias

P.S.: I am also OK, if we go "regression only" for RC5


Am 11.10.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> After a night's sleep I decided that we should release
> the best possible version of AOO 4.1.x as possible. Releasing
> one w/ 2 known regressions just doesn't make sense.
>
> So the remaining question was/is: What do we call it?
>
> I decided that, procedurally, the AOO414 tag was premature,
> and, as such, can be removed. I've gone ahead and done that.
>
> So the plan is to "re-open" branches/AOO414; I will then apply
> to it the 2 patches that have been applied to branches/AOO415
> (after adjusting the version numbers). At that point, we can
> start on 4.1.4-RC5
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature