openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Date Fri, 17 Aug 2018 05:51:31 GMT
I have managed to make time on the next weekend's. So I volunteer for Release Manager.  Hope
it helps to get this from the table.

Am 25. Juli 2018 23:29:53 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs <Petko@Apache.org>:
>I do not believe we have a fix for that. so until someone fixes this, I
>
>do not see a chance.
>
>
>On 25.07.2018 17:18, FR web forum wrote:
>> Regression: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127646
>> This release will fix it?
>>
>> ----- Mail original -----
>>> De: "Jim Jagielski" <jim@jaguNET.com>
>>> À: "OOo Apache" <dev@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Juillet 2018 15:48:00
>>> Objet: Re: A 4.1.6 Release
>>>
>>> No worries. I have my VMs ready to go.
>>>
>>>> On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:47 AM, Peter kovacs <petko@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fyi: To my frustration I failed yesterday to proceed. My next
>>>> timeslot is on Wednesday. I hope nothing will interfere.
>>>>
>>>> Am 21. Juli 2018 08:28:47 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs
>>>> <peter.kovacs@posteo.de>:
>>>>> I hope i have time on Sunday. I wanted to proceed last Sunday but
>>>>> failed on this.
>>>>> Currently my calendar is kind of full. Next possible opportunity
>>>>> is
>>>>> conning Wednesday.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am undecided if the 4.1.6 will be the last release. But after
>>>>> 4.1.6 I
>>>>> agree 4.2.0 beta should get priority. I can imagine that at least
>>>>> one
>>>>> maintenance release could be possible while we stabilize 4.2.0. In
>>>>> the
>>>>> beta phase.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 19. Juli 2018 19:49:46 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
>>>>> <matthias.seidel@hamburg.de>:
>>>>>> Back to the topic:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we want to release 4.1.6, we should start the process
>>>>>> described
>>>>>> here:
>>>>>>
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, 4.1.6 should really be the last 4.1.x. (my opinion).
>>>>>> We
>>>>> have
>>>>>> to get 4.2.0 releasable!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 22:46 schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Marcus <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation,
where we
>>>>>> decided
>>>>>>>>>> that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one
argument
>>>>>>>>>> was,
>>>>>>>>>> if they
>>>>>>>>>> want something they should support us. This is not
showing
>>>>>> sympathy
>>>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>> small user group that uses very old software for
2 more years
>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> have to move to CentOS 7. I personally think that
the
>>>>>>>>>> gstreamer
>>>>>>>>>> Topic can
>>>>>>>>>> be solved after we have released a beta version.
Damjan and I
>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> pointed
>>>>>>>>>> out a lot of possible ways to deal with the issue.
Just for
>>>>>>>>>> now I
>>>>>>>>>> think we
>>>>>>>>>> have other problems then gstreamer in 4.2.0. I think
it is my
>>>>>> fault
>>>>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>>>>> put that argument so much in the front line, but
that stuck
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>>>> In the last months we had a drop in activity. And
more then
>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>> topic
>>>>>>>>>> received not the attention it deserved. I would not
conclude
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> anyone
>>>>>>>>>> has stopped caring at this point in time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let us conclude for now:
>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x is still in maintenance. And in my opinion
we could
>>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining it until 2020 when CentOS6 drops out
of
>>>>>>>>>> maintenance.
>>>>>> Some
>>>>>>>>>> support from CentOS6 side would be nice. But we need
to
>>>>>>>>>> search
>>>>>>>>>> someone for
>>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>>> I have that on my todo list, but did not manage to
follow it
>>>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> incl. gstreamer 0.1.0 that is now within the 4.1.x code.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PS:
>>>>>>>>> CentOS 6 will be supported until Nov 2020; which means
another
>>>>> ~2.5
>>>>>>>>> years.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 4.2.0 has I think 3 bugs we know about and that blocks
a beta
>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>>>> Current target for building with gstreamer is CentOS7.
>>>>>>>>>> Building
>>>>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>>>>> gstreamer could be done on CentOS6. We should keep
the code
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> trunc CentOS
>>>>>>>>>> 6 compatible where ever we can for now. That will
make it
>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>> back port
>>>>>>>>>> patches to 4.1.x if we decide to maintain 4.1.x until
EOL of
>>>>>> CentOS6.
>>>>>>>>> In 4.2.0 we can still keep gstreamer 0.1.0 or update
to
>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>> newer.
>>>>>>>>> To be honest, I don't care *about this special topic*.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And it is only relevant on Linux, right?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IMHO more relevant is the baseline: When we increase
the
>>>>>>>>> CentOS
>>>>>>>>> version we
>>>>>>>>> also raise the sysreq for Linux kernel, glibc, etc. This
has a
>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>> bigger
>>>>>>>>> impact for our users.
>>>>>>>> ​You are absolutely correct about this, Marcus. Monitoring
the
>>>>>> 32-bit
>>>>>>>> Linux
>>>>>>>> downloads might help here. It does seem like AOO could be
>>>>>>>> moving
>>>>>> away
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>> 32-bit for Linux and other operating systems. I don't know
what
>>>>>>>> impact this
>>>>>>>> will have overall though.
>>>>>>> I don't remember exactly, does the gstreamer 0.1.0 vs. 1.0.0
>>>>>>> discussion is also connected to the Linux 32-bit builds? If so,
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> solution could be indeed to drop the 32-bit builds. From SF.net
>>>>> stats
>>>>>>> I get the following (2018-01-01 until today).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW:
>>>>>>> Very likely it's the used OS the download is started from. And
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> OS where OpenOffice should be installed on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OS        %
>>>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>>>> Windows        86,1165
>>>>>>> Macintosh     7,8424
>>>>>>> Unknown         4,9012
>>>>>>> Linux         1,0621
>>>>>>> Android         0,0762
>>>>>>> BSD         0,0011
>>>>>>> Solaris         0,0006
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But even then, I'm sure the most downloads from resp. for Linux
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> be for 64-bit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Has anybody more exact numbers - or an idea how to get them?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 03.07.2018 23:50, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> What impact has Ant 1.10.x exactly on older machines?
>>>>>>>>>>> It is no problem for me to build the Windows
version with
>>>>>>>>>>> Ant
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.9.12. As
>>>>>>>>>>> long as we use Java 8.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But again, I just did a personal build to test
AOO 4.1.x
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>> Java 8.
>>>>>>>>>>> Nothing else.
>>>>>>>>>>> To be more precise: I was the only one who cared.
No
>>>>>>>>>>> response
>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>> members!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.07.2018 um 23:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was
no longer
>>>>>>>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> plus
>>>>>>>>>>>> had some sort of security related issue making
it unsuited
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO... ie,
>>>>>>>>>>>> we *needed* to use Ant 1.10 not just that
we now *can* use
>>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about showing some sympathy and understanding
for those
>>>>>>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>>>>>> may be
>>>>>>>>>>>> stuck w/ older machines? After all, let's
be real, our
>>>>> continued
>>>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>> for "older" systems is the only real thing
we have going
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> us... It's
>>>>>>>>>>>> these little things that make significant
ripples in our
>>>>>>>>>>>> eco-system and we
>>>>>>>>>>>> seem to not really care about that anymore.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>>> <matthias.seidel@hamburg.de>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter
Kovacs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <petko@Apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everbody.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6
Release on the way in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> July.
>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manage to get 4.2.0 ready it
will only be a beta. And we
>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some stuff to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get out to the people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias has created a suggestion
for a 4.1.6 release on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Containing some security fixes,
plus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Java 8 Update 172
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Apache Ant 1.10.3
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12?
Why the need for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.10.x?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we
build with Java 8 we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it... ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept
what can be done
>>>>> with
>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.1.x.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But of course we can build with 1.9.x
if that is wanted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>       Matthias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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

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


Mime
View raw message