Reply to all, not only Jim:
Wow, I just had a day off and now my inbox is exploding.
Honestly, was it necessary to act within a few hours? Wouldn't it be
better to wait more time?
There is no BZ issue, no blocker request, just mails. The builds aren't
yet public, no communication was gone to the world until now. So, I
don't see a reason to hurry up here.
Really, please let us follow our own processes. Otherwise we cannot be
sure not to forget something.
Marcus
Am 10.10.2017 um 17:59 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Mathias Röllig <mroellig.n...@gmx.net> wrote:
Hello Raphael!
Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and
release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds
with > the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick
within the ASF policy.
A patch for *all* platforms must also be tested in all ways. So I think, this
way isn't an easy and good way.
Simply let 4.1.4 as is but don't let it (official) free.
Create a 4.1.5-RC1 (or maybe 4.1.4-RC5 if possible) with this patch, and if no
further errors announce 4.1.5.
IMO, this does seem like the most prudent way. Yes, it increases *our*
workload, but it also is the most transparent and prudent for our end-users
and any ISVs. For better or worse, ASF source code tags are immutable
since they are the things that "define" a release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
