openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Digital signing release for windows.
Date Thu, 01 Jan 2015 22:48:20 GMT
On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:

> On 30/12/2014 jan i wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, December 30, 2014, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>
>>> Open issues were:
>>> 1) Decide on making 4.1.1.1, 4.1.2, whatever. This is solved, we are
>>> going
>>> to make a new release and call it 4.1.2.
>>> 2) Fix access to certificate for signing. Still waiting for Infra, but I
>>> can't blame them.
>>> 3) Decide what to include. I opened a dedicated discussion yesterday,
>>> with
>>> an explicit list of about 20 bugs to consider.
>>> 4) Add 4.1.2 to Bugzilla. We need a Bugzilla admin to do it, asked
>>> yesterday.
>>>
>> we also need
>> 5) discuss do we need a release candidate or do we vote on the real thing.
>>
>
> If I understand correctly, the best option is to tag a source package that
> identifies itself as "OpenOffice 4.1.2" and vote on that (so it's a Release
> Candidate but if approved it becomes the final one, and so far there is
> nothing new), but binaries may be an issue since we would spend a lot of
> time (and also many signing credits, which are not for free) if we sign
> Windows artifacts that will not be approved. Here I can understand you
> request to vote only on source + English Windows binary + other platforms
> binaries and then build other languages separately, only after the first
> vote has passed. I agree with that.
>
>  6) get confirmation from j├╝rgen that he has time now to this "double"
>> release
>> 6a) check if he can do all platforms or alternatively find out how to do
>> the rest
>> 7) make sure henkp will help with the mirrors again, last time he was less
>> than pleased due to the 1week window of regular work.
>>
>
> I think henkp stopped uploading releases to the mirrors. 4.1.1 is on
> SourceForge only, since putting it on Apache mirrors was a lot of work by
> Infra for negligible benefit to the users. So step 7 can probably be
> ignored.
>

Only "source" is available through Apache mirrors, no binaries.


>
>  8) prepare release notes etc.
>>
>
> Well, once we are set to make a release the release checklist applies:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/
> Release+Planning+Template
> (of course, most items do not apply since this is a micro release).
>
>  As for the source code, we don't even need a new branch (even though I
>>> would be for creating it); as you see at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/
>>> openoffice/branches/ for 4.1.1 we reused the "AOO410" branch.
>>>
>> I am aware of that, personally I dont like it, because we loose track of
>> what was released, but I will leave that to the release manager.
>>
>
> OK, so if nobody sees reasons to reuse "AOO410" I think we agree that we
> will create a "AOO412" branch for 4.1.2.


This is a correct assessment to my POV.


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


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"There's a bit of magic in everything,
  and some loss to even things out."
                            -- Lou Reed

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message