> On Oct 31, 2017, at 11:05 AM, Matthias Seidel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Am 31.10.2017 um 18:52 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> On Oct 31, 2017, at 9:51 AM, Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I do not know if this is the right choice, but we should include doing both >>> in our thinking. Rebuild 4.1.4 for Mac only, test, and upload as soon as >>> possible. Meanwhile, create, test, and vote on 4.1.5, to pick up the >>> upgrade service. >> I agree this what we need to think about. With the new 4.1.4 route we should >> make sure that we can tell the difference between the bad original and the >> repaired build. Is the date sufficient or would build number be better? I >> really don’t like the idea of people being confused about what they need to >> do to fix issues. Right now the message is to downgrade to 4.1.3. > > My $ 0.02: > The date would be sufficient. > A new build number means a new build and I don't like the idea to > confuse 95% of our users (Windows and Linux) with a "new" version, where > not a single line of code was changed. > Rebuild the mac version and make an announcement/press release to let > the people know about it.
Jim is mentioning a different id for the build from the one that drives the upgrade: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/genUpdateFeed/ProductInfos.txt?view=markup 4.1.4 OpenOffice_4 9788 https://www.openoffice.org/download <https://www.openoffice.org/download> en-US ast bg ca ca-XR ca-XV cs da de el en-GB es eu fi fr gd gl he hi hu it ja km ko lt nb nl pl pt pt-BR ru sk sl sr sv ta th tr vi zh-CN zh-TW 9788 is different from 414m5 or 414m6. Jim - I think that 414 > >> >> I would like to know what Andrea and Matthias think since they have been >> working with the upgrade system. > > macOS update notification (4.1.3 -> 4.1.4) is on hold until this issue > is fixed. > But people can always download directly from our download page, maybe we > should put a notice there? > > Regards, Matthias > >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> On 10/31/2017 9:30 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: >>>> There have been over 1,000,000 downloads of 4.1.4. How many were of the >>>> bad Mac version? >>>> If we replace then how would those people know to upgrade? >>>> This issue makes me think we need to have this be a new version so that we >>>> can setup the upgrade service correctly. >>>> Regards, >>>> Dave >>>>> On Oct 31, 2017, at 9:21 AM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Question: Assuming we have "correction" builds available, >>>>> what do we do? Simply replace the online version with >>>>> these? >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
