openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From FR web forum <ooofo...@free.fr>
Subject Re: Release Manager for 4.2.0?
Date Mon, 23 May 2016 07:51:20 GMT
Hello all,
Any news for this next 4.2.0?

----- Mail original -----
De: "Andrea Pescetti" <pescetti@apache.org>
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Dimanche 27 Mars 2016 22:13:11
Objet: Re: Release Manager for 4.2.0?

On 29/01/2016 Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> For 4.2.0 we need a Release Manager. I would prefer NOT to be the
> Release Manager for 4.2.0 since I'm finding that in this period I can
> help more productively with tasks that do not require constant
> interaction ...
> I am surely available to have a significant role in the 4.2.0 release

A few days after writing this, almost 2 months ago, sudden events left 
me incapacitated to make any significant contributions until very 
recently. I'm still unable to make long-term commitments.

Anyway, there are some issues we need to get done as a team before 
appointing a release manager makes sense:

1) Enough code. Done. The merge of the recent gbuild work totally 
justifies a 4.2.0 release. Also, in 4.1.2 we only included a tiny 
fraction of the fixes that (at that time) were available on trunk. So 
here we are already OK, and we've been OK for months.

2) Localization. I got shell access to the Pootle server a few days ago. 
I'm still looking around, and if someone else want to join this is an 
important part. We need to have a solid process for updating 
translations (the full route: new strings in code -> Pootle -> back to 
code -> in localized builds) in place.

3) Buildbots and ASF-owned build machines. Buildbots are not essential 
for a release: 4.1.2 was built (like all previous releases in history) 
on non-ASF hardware; even if we build 4.2.0 on ASF-owned hardware, we 
can't use buildbots for it; we need to setup new systems. Those who read 
the infrastructure@ list can see the discussion I started there 
yesterday. Still, having buildbots helps QA and having ASF-owned build 
machines is an important investment for the project: at that point we 
will be able to make a release within days, not months. We should make 
as much progress as we can here. Again, if anybody can help, this is an 
important area.

4) There are several optimizations I have in mind, especially on 
reducing a bit our binary size on Linux (trust me, it is really a pain 
to commit all those binaries to SVN, or to any version control system). 
But they are not essential.

I have just committed to the devtools/ area the scripts we (mainly 
Juergen) used to build the 4.1.2 release, with specs of the build 
machines. I've had them since last October, but I never committed them. 
They are a first step if we want to build our release binaries on ASF 
hardware: they contain build options and config.log to have some more 
information on the environment.

My next priorities will be localization (especially, re-exporting the 
Italian translation to Pootle and re-importing it) and and a 
proof-of-concept VM for building releases on Linux (64 bit) based on the 
above scripts. There is plenty of room for other to jump in (Linux 32, 
Windows, Mac; or localization management) so please do!

Regards,
   Andrea.

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


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


Mime
View raw message