openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andre Fischer>
Subject Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2012 07:17:02 GMT
On 31.05.2012 18:12, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Andre Fischer<>  wrote:
>> On 31.05.2012 14:51, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Pedro Giffuni<>    wrote:
>>>> --- Mer 30/5/12, Rob Weir<>    ha scritto:
>> [...]
>>> So instead of a an axe, let's try a scalpel.  The ext_sources tree was
>>> branched along with the rest of the the AOO 3.4 tree.  So you should
>>> be able to safely work on the branch, defining the external
>>> dependencies there.  This could be done without touching the trunk and
>>> without breaking the 3.4.0 release.  Then, after 3.4.1 is released, we
>>> can bring those changes to the trunk.
>>> Does that make sense?  We don't break our release distributions until
>>> we have a working replacement in the form of 3.4.1.  If that means we
>>> delay graduation until 3.4.1, then so be it.
>> You are talking about a new branch, right, not the 3.4.1 branch?
> I thought the 3.4.1 branch would be appropriate.  Move the category-b
> tarballs to Apache Extras, and make the build fetch from there instead
> of from SVN.  That way the trunk's copy of these dependencies doesn't
> disappear yet.  Then when we release 3.4.1, we have a release that is
> not dependent on the SVN copies, and we can safely remove them then.

My understanding is that we have to make sure that the files referenced 
by the (source) release do not go away.  That did not work so well for 
the 3.4 release because they where referenced on trunk.  If the 3.4.1 
release references the files on the branch then that should be safe(r).
Trunk is where the main part of development takes place.

> The problem we have now is that even though we branched after the 3.4
> release, the build script is still fetching from the trunk copy of the
> dependencies.  So we need to fix this is a somewhat backwards way.

For the 3.4 release we have to restore the tar-balls that where deleted 
since the release.  That does of course not mean that the newer versions 
have to be removed as well.  Due to different version numbers and MD5 
sums they have different names and can coexist.


> Or am I missing something?
> -Rob
>> -Andre

View raw message