Hi Marcus, Am 07.03.19 um 21:03 schrieb Marcus: > Am 07.03.19 um 17:02 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> On Mar 7, 2019, at 6:31 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>> >>> ++1 >>> >>>> On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Matthias Seidel >>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> As mentioned before, I think we need some more time before doing a >>>> (public) beta. >>>> But I also want to get a wider user base for testing and something >>>> "official" we can base our discussions on. >>>> >>>> So here is my proposal: >>>> >>>> We could create a tag (snapshot420 or whatever) and build it as a >>>> developer snapshot. >>>> This can be done similar to a beta with the build targets: >>>> openofficedev, ooodevlanguagepack and sdkoodev. >>>> >>>> We also have a special splashscreen for a "Developer Snapshot": >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO42X/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/intro.png >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to have all recent translations committed and merged >>>> before >>>> we create the tag. >>>> March would be a good time, so we could also include the updated >>>> English >>>> dictionary. >>>> >>>> The build should be uploaded to an official place together with all >>>> hashes and PGP signatures. >>>> It could be announced with a blog post linked on our homepage. >>>> >>>> Opinions? >> >> Would we limit the distribution as follows? >> We would not distribute to SourceForge. >> We would not put this on the OpenOffice.org download page. > > and how to you want the people to download the files? Via a long list > of links? I hope not as it would be clearly a big step backwards what > we have available now. ;-)
Remember, we are talking about a Developer Snapshot here... ;-) The procedure would be exactly the same as for our Release Candidates. Matthias > > Marcus > > > >> We would put the distribution on our official Apache Dist page, but >> not allow the Apache Mirrors to pick it up (as now, but make sure >> with Infra first) >> We would only note the distribution from the blog post and emails to >> all of our openoffice.apache.org <http://openoffice.apache.org/> >> mailing lists. >> We would allow the Forums to POST where it is available if it is a >> way to solve user issues. >> >> (I think we need to warn Infra in case too many are taking this >> version from www.apache.org/dist/ <http://www.apache.org/dist/>.) >> >>>> Am 18.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>> Release, as in GA, or release as in Beta? >>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 15, 2019, at 4:55 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug 125129 looks like a wild goose chase and requires considerable >>>>>> understanding of the framework layer, but I'll try continue when >>>>>> I have >>>>>> time. >>>>>> >>>>>> My own release checklist would include: >>>>>> 1. Library audit. >>>>>> 1.1 Did we lose or gain any public symbols in our libraries since >>>>>> the >>>>>> 4.1.0? Gbuild requires explicit export instead of exporting >>>>>> everything and >>>>>> then possibly controlling visibility with a .map file, so it's very >>>>>> possible. >>>>>> 1.2 Did ELF symbol versions on *nix platforms change? The older >>>>>> gbuild >>>>>> modules probably did, as I didn't understand the meaning of .map >>>>>> files back >>>>>> then. >>>>>> 1.3 Are the same libraries with the same names available in both >>>>>> 4.1.0 and >>>>>> 4.2.0? >>>>>> 2. Base: >>>>>> 2.1 Complete the Java SDBC driver framework, used by both the new >>>>>> SDBC-JDBC >>>>>> bridge and the Postgres SDBC driver. >>>>>> 2.2 Audit the new SDBC-JDBC bridge in Java against the old C++ >>>>>> one, fix any >>>>>> differences. >>>>>> 2.3 Complete the Postgres SDBC driver; still needs views, users, >>>>>> groups, >>>>>> etc. >>>>>> 2.4 Complete the integration of the Postgres SDBC driver into the >>>>>> Base UI >>>>>> forms (like MySQL already is). >>>>>> 3. Crashreporter >>>>>> 3.1 Get it working again. >>>>>> 3.2 Bug reported in UI form (instead of submitted to some now >>>>>> obsolete >>>>>> server), which can be copied/pasted or attached to Bugzilla. >>>>>> 4. Testing >>>>>> 4.1 Run all available tests (unit tests, smoketest, module >>>>>> integration >>>>>> tests, bvt, fvt, etc.) against 4.1.0 and 4.2.0, find and fix any >>>>>> regressions. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:25 AM Matthias Seidel >>>>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO, the situation hasn't changed so much. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We should at least fix issue 125129 [1] before we release a >>>>>>> (public) >>>>>>> beta. I have seen that Damjan is investigating... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then we need time to inform translators on l10n@ before we can >>>>>>> export >>>>>>> the latest translations from Pootle. >>>>>>> At the moment most of them are at 98% for the UI but the SDF >>>>>>> files still >>>>>>> need to be updated in source. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125129 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 14.02.19 um 17:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>>>> Time for another ping... what does everyone think? Time? > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
