openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: release manager for the next release
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2014 07:33:38 GMT
On 05/10/14 19:06, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:21 AM, jan i <> wrote:
>> On 4 October 2014 22:08, Andrea Pescetti <> wrote:
>>> On 04/10/2014 jan i wrote:
>>>> Thanks jürgen for the work you have done.
>>> Sure, thanks Juergen for being a great, reliable and patient release
>>> manager during these years.
>>>  In other words, I strongly believe we have to depend on non-apache
>>>> hardware
>>>> to produce a major part of the binaries. A new release manager should
>>>> provide or have access to several VMs in order to cut the release. It
>> has
>>>> always looked as if Jürgen had direct or indirect access to all the
>>>> platforms needed.
>>> Well, this is a thing we must change. Ideally, we must be able to produce
>>> all binaries at Apache for the next release. We are now depending on
>>> individual developers providing their own systems, but this won't work
>> for
>>> other ongoing activities too (like signing releases). If you look at the
>>> Infra list recent discussions, it seems we will be able to get our hands
>> on
>>> suitable Mac hardware soon.
>>> So in short: a new release is not going to happen before we have fixed
>> the
>>> release process. Part of this fix can be very challenging, like bringing
>>> all building activities to Apache hardware. But we shouldn't expect that
>>> what a release manager needs NOW is valid for the NEXT release.
>> Same time last year, the Apple hardware was signed for ordering, when Infra
>> found out it lacked budget. This year the discussion goes, "no more
>> hardware until what we have runs", and that is assumed to take until first
>> part of 2015. So in other words dont put up too high hopes. Have a look at
>> the jira ticket instead.
>> Furthermore, please remember, AOO cannot cimpile on a standard Apple
>> platform, we need some old (outdated unsupported apple libraries/tools
>> installed, that makes the machine useless (or at the very least very
>> difficult) to use for projects that want to use the newest apple platform.
> I hope we can get some clarification on the above statement --
> " old (outdated unsupported apple libraries/tools
> installed"
> esp with respect to Mac since we recently dropped support for anything
> below 10.7.
> In any case,  reassessing the  library/other externals versions for all
> platforms is definitely in order.

simply spoken a wrong or misleading info from Jan, the last AOO release
was made on the latest MacOS version (at this time) with XCode 5.

Missing Apple hardware is one problem for one platform. Missing Linux
system with proper baseline is the other one that can be addressed by
providing VMs with a suitable system.

My hope is that we can find consensus with infra about this and can have
such VMs soon.


>>>  A release manager does not need to be PMC, but only the PMC have binding
>>>> votes for a release......this can theoritically lead to a situation
>> where
>>>> the vote ends with only +1, but the release manager gives a non-binding
>>>> -1.
>>>> If nothing else that should lead to a funny board report.
>>> This is a theoretical case. The Release Manager is trusted. If I receive
>> a
>>> -1 from the Release Manager, I'll immediately change my +1 vote to a -1
>> and
>>> so will do other PMC members. Let's focus on concrete discussions.
>>>  Ps. it seems markmail does not support inline responses, or am I doing
>>>> something wrong ?
>>> I'll be BCCing you in my responses to your messages so at least we don't
>>> break threads.
>> thanks but really not needed, I unsubscribed from the list in order to be
>> able to check the dev mails when I want to, without having my mailbox
>> filled up. I can see that I do not break threads, but merely cannot respond
>> inline.
>> rgds
>> jan I
>>> Regards,
>>>   Andrea.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message