I suppose the best way to fix this is to help kendy (and/or whomever)
expedite the m106 merge and back-merge to master -
Which will result, no doubt, in master being horribly unbuildable on Windows
for some weeks.
But what the heck, people who definitely need a buildable master on
Hi Bjoern,
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 11:40 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
What we decided to do was to just commit the safe fixes to the 3-4
branch and merge them into master in one go
Right.
Note that many of us were (and still are?) focusing on stabilizing
the 3.4 branch and didn't have
Hi Michael,
On Tue, 24 May 2011 10:52:29 +0100
Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com
wrote:
Note that many of us were (and still are?) focusing on stabilizing
the 3.4 branch and didn't have a working master.
Which is just plain wrong and needs immediate fixing. Keeping master
buildable
Hi Bjoern,
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 13:44 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Which is just plain wrong and needs immediate fixing. Keeping master
buildable must be as high in priority as doing that with the release
branch.
I suggest we cool off and discuss this, in a more measured way, in
Seems to be fixed already in a different way in -3-4 (and presumably -3-4-0) by
Kohei in 06b6df6759929073e917ae0fa7e819407d3e2555 , fdo#36288: Fixed a crasher
on Base on Apr 20. Why the crash still happens then, no idea. Anyway,
cherry-pick fails.
I guess a merge of -3-4 to master is long
Hi Tor,
On 2011-05-23 at 04:52 -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
Seems to be fixed already in a different way in -3-4 (and presumably
-3-4-0) by Kohei in 06b6df6759929073e917ae0fa7e819407d3e2555 ,
fdo#36288: Fixed a crasher on Base on Apr 20. Why the crash still
happens then, no idea. Anyway,
The current state is in integration/dev300_m106, I'll be grateful for any
help there.
Is there any email or wiki writeup on what is the recommended workflow, etc? I
would love to help, but I don't know what to do.
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing
Sorry, got my words mixed up. What I mean was obviously:
Well, the policy, at least as some of us (me included) have understood it, was
that the stable branch gets merged into the development branch (master)
regularly, so no need to commit fixes to both. But yeah, it does now seem safer
to
On Mon, 23 May 2011 06:39:52 -0600
Tor Lillqvist tlillqv...@novell.com
wrote:
Well, the policy, at least as some of us (me included) have
understood it, was that the development branch gets merged into
master regularly, so no need to commit fixes to both. But yeah, it
does now seem safer to
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:29 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Hi Tor,
On Mon, 23 May 2011 04:52:26 -0600
Tor Lillqvist tlillqv...@novell.com
wrote:
Seems to be fixed already in a different way in -3-4
Why that ever been done? Fixing something on the release branch, but not
on the
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:56 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2011 06:39:52 -0600
Tor Lillqvist tlillqv...@novell.com
wrote:
Well, the policy, at least as some of us (me included) have
understood it, was that the development branch gets merged into
master regularly, so no
Hi Kohei,
On Mon, 23 May 2011 10:08:38 -0400
Kohei Yoshida kyosh...@novell.com wrote:
Because that's what we decided to do during our TSC meeting IIRC. The
premise was that we would do merge regularly into master, ~at least
once per week as we did during the 3.3 release. But for some reason
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 17:14 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Hi Kohei,
On Mon, 23 May 2011 10:08:38 -0400
Kohei Yoshida kyoshida-et1tbqhtxzrqt0dzr+a...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Because that's what we decided to do during our TSC meeting IIRC. The
premise was that we would do merge
13 matches
Mail list logo
