The other thing I probably should mention here is that this presents a golden opportunity to collaborate with LO should the "old" ooo infrastructure be considered unable to handle another ooo release.
----- Original Message ---- > From: Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 9:11:09 AM > Subject: Re: Releasing OOo 3.4 on the old infrastructure > > Point of reference: the subversion project used non-ASF infrastructure > to conduct releases that would've been blocked by ASF policy on licensing > > had they used our mirror system. It is certainly possible to do the > same sort of thing with ooo for an interim solution, until the codebase > has been "cleaned up" to meet with ASF policy. > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Eike Rathke <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 9:06:52 AM > > Subject: Re: Releasing OOo 3.4 on the old infrastructure > > > > Hi Andrea, > > > > On Sunday, 2011-07-03 18:27:09 +0200, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > > > > 2) OpenOffice.org 3.4 is mostly ready. I built the latest code from hg > > > a couple weeks ago and I've regularly used it so far. The quality is > > > good and there is no risk of damaging the OOo reputation. All > > > release stoppers are bugs that will have to be fixed anyway, and > > > fixing them later will require the same amount of time. > > > > There are a couple of CWSs targeted to OOo3.4 that address release > > critical bugs and are not integrated to the OOO340 code line yet. Many > > of them have status nominated, some not. A release should include them, > > problem is that on the old OOo infrastructure work can't happen as > > > > a) we don't know if that infrastructure will be available sufficiently > > long enough for all release relevant work > > > > b) releases with the OpenOffice.org brand name will be bound to the > > trademark and can only be done by the trademark owner, IMHO (IANAL) > > > > On the other hand, a release can't be done quickly on Apache, be it for > > the incubator status of this project or merely because of technical > > reasons that we won't get a releasable status of the code base in time > > as we won't have the original OOO340 code base under ASL. > > > > I would be delighted if someone pointed out a way we could solve that > > dilemma, but I fear we're stuck at the moment. > > > > Eike > > > > -- > > PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication. > > Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD > > >
