Hi all,
Am 16.08.2026 um 03:12 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Aug 14, 2026, at 7:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Hi all,
sorry can not find the mail from Dave.
I want to clarify what we target for AOO release for AOO5.
- Windows 10 on X64
- MacOS Big Sur on Intel
I’m not sure that this type of release makes much sense. I think we should we
EOL our MacOS intel support with AOO41X? I could be wrong.
What is your argument?
Mine is that we build for the community. If all it takes is a release
build, then better build it.
I would build a legacy WinXP version if that would be possible from the
AOO5Xrelease branch. Or a win7 Version if requested. We have 1 request
for mac intel release, which is sufficient for me to build a intel version.
Having that said, I had a very interesting discussion with Thorsten
Behrens from Collabora, on FroSCon in st Augustin which is running this
weekend. And one topic was release strategy.
sorry I can not repeat our discussion. Only The result of the outcome of
my reflection. And that is to create a community process that declares
what binary we provide and what not.
What we could do is only to target the latest supported versions at
default (win11, latest mac silicon, linux latest gcc?).
If we find volunteers to test the legacy target then we will provide the
legacy version too. Or drop the required Version for our binaries.
So for example we build only on the newest platform that our code can
support. If the users from the community want a intel version, we
request that a team for that target volunteers, learns how and to test
the release.
A platform will be retired if a target looses their test volunteers or
the code outgrows the support for the platform, as has happened now for
WinXP.
Evaluation of a Target platform is then not a decision but a process.
I am not sure if we should think to declare our code release different.
We have in the past always communicated in favor of the ordenary users.
Maybe we should not apply the pattern to our source release.
And communicate rather what build environment we support. We could add a
resulting platform table, which OS / Distro could build AOO from the
code. Much more technical, less comunity driven, but code is something
that is not user community related.
With the cyber security act the reseller, are suddenly in a
responsibility to maintain the code. And then this will be of importance.
This are all ideas of course. I am not demanding any of these.
- MacOS Big Sur on Apple Silicon
- Linux Based on Ubuntu 14 on X64
Is this correct for now?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
