On 01/21/2018 07:15 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
Hello Kay,
I am sorry for the delay. The PMC has accepted your request to
re-instatement as a commiter. We are glad that you took the step and
we looking forward to your contribution.
Please people give her a nice welcome back! :-D
All the best
P
On 1/21/2018 7:15 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hello Kay,
>
> I am sorry for the delay. The PMC has accepted your request to
> re-instatement as a commiter. We are glad that you took the step and we
> looking forward to your contribution.
>
> Please people give her a nice welcome back! :-D
>
> All
Hello Kay,
I am sorry for the delay. The PMC has accepted your request to
re-instatement as a commiter. We are glad that you took the step and we
looking forward to your contribution.
Please people give her a nice welcome back! :-D
All the best
Peter
--
is will change in the next months.
>
> Also we want to thank you for the past year and hope to see you all in
> 2018.
>
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
>
Thanks for the nice New Year's present!
>
>
>
> ---- Weitergeleitete Nachricht
Thank you to you all and a good way into 2018
Mechtilde
Am 30.12.2017 um 18:59 schrieb FR web forum:
> Good job
> Thanks to have updated french webpages :-)
>
> - Mail original -
>> De: "Marcus"
>> À: "dev@"
>> Envoyé: Samedi 30 Décem
Good job!
Thanks to have updated french webpages :-)
- Mail original -
> De: "Marcus"
> À: "dev@"
> Envoyé: Samedi 30 Décembre 2017 17:31:47
> Objet: Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] Apache OpenOffice 4.1.5 released
>
> Hello OpenOffice community,
>
> befo
year and hope to see you all in 2018.
Marcus
(on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
Weitergeleitete Nachricht
Betreff: [ANNOUNCE] Apache OpenOffice 4.1.5 released
Datum: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:20:29 +0100
Von: Marcus
Antwort an: annou...@openoffice.apache.org
An:
Congratulations and Happy Holidays.
Looking forward to The New Year.
Chery
-Original Message-
From: Peter kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 4:18 PM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [NEW CHAIR] Peter Kovacs is the new chair for Apache
Hi,
I have done that a little in the beginning of the voting. So maybe I repeated
some parts.
I live in Germany near Frankfurt am Main. I speak English and German. I know a
little (very little) French and Hungarian.
I am working for the Reply group, which is an IT Consulting Company in the big
t;
> Congratulations! :-)
>
> Please support Peter with actions were he need information or help.
>
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
Congratulations Peter.
Regards
Keith
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
;
> Congratulations! :-)
>
> Please support Peter with actions were he need information or help.
>
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
>
>
Congratulations, Peter! Wishing you the best in
Hello,
> Peter was already elected as new chair on Dec 16th and is
> therefore now our new chair.
Congratulations
Is it possible to know you better?
Where do you live?
Do you work for a OpenOffice-related company or just contribute in your spare
time?
And anything else you want to mention.
dy elected as new chair on Dec 16th and is therefore
>> now our new chair.
>>
>> Congratulations! :-)
>>
>> Please support Peter with actions were he need information or help.
>>
>> Marcus
>> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
>>
&
lease support Peter with actions were he need information or help.
Marcus
(on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
need information or help.
Marcus
(on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Am 15.12.2017 um 07:19 schrieb Peter kovacs:
I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
focus.
In this case it were to not give attackspace to possible trolls. That's why I
called it Libre Office troll feedback loop. Li
Am 08.12.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Marcus:
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
replying to this thread.
[ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
thanks to all for your participation in this vote. It pass
Thanks for this Peter. Let’s just focus on what we can control!
Best Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 15, 2017, at 1:19 AM, Peter kovacs wrote:
>
> I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
> Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
> focus.
> In
I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
focus.
In this case it were to not give attackspace to possible trolls. That's why I
called it Libre Office troll feedback loop. Libre does only show up because
they use Libre f
Am 14.12.2017 um 09:21 schrieb Peter kovacs:
It is not about what we agree upon.
This is a public vote. And whoever gives a vote is deciding now.
Maybe this is an effect from trolling against us, but I do not think there is
space for public weakness or naivete. (And I try not do do both...)
I t
Hi Carl,
It is not about what we agree upon.
This is a public vote. And whoever gives a vote is deciding now.
Maybe this is an effect from trolling against us, but I do not think there is
space for public weakness or naivete. (And I try not do do both...)
I thought about putting my preferences
On 12/08/2017 07:53 PM, Marcus wrote:
> [...]
> Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
> replying to this thread.
>
> [ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
> [ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
> [ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
+1 for Peter Kovacs (petko)
Herbert
-
On 12/13/2017 07:08 PM, Peter kovacs wrote:
I am confused. There was no proper " I do not want to candidate anymore mail."
But maybe my English is not good enough.
A one candidate vote is something completely different as between 2+
candidates. Such a step should be well thought of if this is r
Hi all,
Here is my vote.
[X] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
Thanks,
khirano
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 4:53 AM, Marcus wrote:
> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
> OpenOffic
.2017 um 13:29 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>>> I do not understand. :(
>>> But isn't the vote then invalid?
>>>
>>> Am 13. Dezember 2017 12:09:47 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
>:
>>>> [x] Peter Kovacs (petko)
>>>>
>>>> Although he is the only
isn't the vote then invalid?
Am 13. Dezember 2017 12:09:47 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
[x] Peter Kovacs (petko)
Although he is the only candidate now... ;-)
Regards, Matthias
Am 08.12.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Marcus:
End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
09:47 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
> :
>> [x] Peter Kovacs (petko)
>>
>> Although he is the only candidate now... ;-)
>>
>> Regards, Matthias
>>
>>
>> Am 08.12.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Marcus:
>>> End of October I wrote that I would like to resig
End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
>> OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year
>> and until now we have rotated the role every year.
>>
>> Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vot
[x] Peter Kovacs (petko)
Although he is the only candidate now... ;-)
Regards, Matthias
Am 08.12.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Marcus:
> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
> OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year
> and unt
I had not voted yet, but with the below, my selection process is a lot
easier. I'll also cast by vote to Peter.
> On Dec 8, 2017, at 6:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
> When I first got in I thought Peter preferred to wait until next year.
>
> However since he is up for it, and my workload is very
[X] Peter Kovacs (petko)
Gav…
> On 9 Dec 2017, at 6:53 am, Marcus wrote:
>
> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache OpenOffice
> PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year and until now we
> have rotated the role every year.
&g
To me a vote with one candidate is a "all In vote". If the vote fails we
are back again at the far more serious questions that we just came away
from.
A vote where I step up not as equal is also not acceptable since it
would be a fake. So if I follow nomination now it have to be a serious
one,
[ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[X] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
Best regards,
Olaf
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@o
On 12/8/2017 11:53 AM, Marcus wrote:
End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year and
until now we have rotated the role every year.
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please
In light of Carl’s withdrawal.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 8, 2017, at 11:59 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Thanks Marcus!
>> On Dec 8, 2017, at 11:53 AM, Marcus wrote:
>>
>> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
>> OpenOffice PM
When I first got in I thought Peter preferred to wait until next year.
However since he is up for it, and my workload is very heavy at the
moment I will bow out and maybe try next year.
Thanks for all who voted for me.
[ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[X] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/w
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> As for Carl's skills, he probably understated his role in plugin
> releases. In one occasion, Carl was the only developer and Release
> Manager and we had to officially release his work. When I had
> to review
> his work, I found it imp
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 8:53 PM
> To: dev@
> Subject: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
>
> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
> OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair
[X] Peter Kovacs (petko)
Marcus
Am 08.12.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Marcus:
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
replying to this thread.
[ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
The [VOTE] will close i
Il 08 Dic 2017 8:53 PM, "Marcus" ha scritto:
End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year and
until now we have rotated the role every year.
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. T
On 12/8/2017 2:53 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
> replying to this thread.
>
[X] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
Keith N. McKenna
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
Marcus wrote:
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
replying to this thread.
[ ] Carl Marcum (cmarcum)
[ ] Peter Kovacs (petko)
[ ] Abstain (I cannot/won't choose between them)
I vote for Carl Marcum (cmarcum), purely due to the nature of the job. I
would prefe
Thanks Marcus!
> On Dec 8, 2017, at 11:53 AM, Marcus wrote:
>
> End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache OpenOffice
> PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year and until now we
> have rotated the role every year.
>
> Luckily
End of October I wrote that I would like to resign from the Apache
OpenOffice PMC Chair position. I'm the chair a bit more than 1 year and
until now we have rotated the role every year.
Luckily we have 2 volunteers: Carl and Peter. Therefore please vote by
replying to this thread.
[ ]
e Board. On one side, this
requires a constant monitoring of the project and some
familiarity/experience with all aspects of OpenOffice as a project. On
the other side, this requires patience, discovery of the processes to
follow, reading some procedural documentation in English that is often
Hello all,
I am also nominating for chair in 2017.
Maybe some small Information about myself. I have joined the Apache
OpenOffice Project in Sept 2016 after in german Mainstream IT Newspage
an article has been printed that OpenOffice has not enough devs and may
close. I decided that this is
s a project. On
the other side, this requires patience, discovery of the processes to
follow, reading some procedural documentation in English that is often
full of Apache jargon or legal terminology.
The work itself is thus a bit boring and clerical. The typical paper
work. Consider that the Chai
quires patience, discovery of the processes to
follow, reading some procedural documentation in English that is often
full of Apache jargon or legal terminology.
The work itself is thus a bit boring and clerical. The typical paper
work. Consider that the Chair will often be active in the project
would review and approve this (small)
>> patch, would it become visible in subversion?
>>
>> Regards, Matthias
>>
>>
>>
>> Weitergeleitete Nachricht
>> Betreff: [apache/openoffice] Fix typo (#4)
>> Datum: Tue, 28 Nov 2
equest on Github...
>
> Just out of interest: If we would review and approve this (small)
> patch, would it become visible in subversion?
>
> Regards, Matthias
>
>
>
> Weitergeleitete Nachricht
> Betreff: [apache/openoffice] Fix typo (#4)
> Datum:
We have a new pull request on Github...
Just out of interest: If we would review and approve this (small) patch,
would it become visible in subversion?
Regards, Matthias
Weitergeleitete Nachricht
Betreff:[apache/openoffice] Fix typo (#4)
Datum: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12
ieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try
>to
>>> merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
>
>So this would be https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pulls - both of
>them are not useful. One is badly written, the other o
Marcus wrote:
Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
So this would be https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pulls - both of
them are not useful. One is badly written, the
Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
One is a portugese Language change.
The other one is a Merge request for 3.4
We should reject them or something. At least for the Langu
Hi all,
I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
One is a portugese Language change.
The other one is a Merge request for 3.4
We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge
request I have set a com
Hello all.
I thought maybe we could have a talk on FOSDEM about the future of this project.
May be we have 4.2.0 out or we are about to release.
Since we are there in person and the thing gets recorded, I believe the
visibility is quite good. (The topic as such will pull in people I guess)
So I
I wanted to know who the autor of the article is. Thanks for the answer
Jörg.
On 22.10.2017 23:05, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 6:11 PM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache OpenOffice 4.1.4 released
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 6:11 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache OpenOffice 4.1.4 released
>
> Who is this guy?
I don't understand the question. I am
http://people.apache.org/comm
Who is this guy?
On 20.10.2017 22:33, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
Hello,
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Dear OpenOffice community,
[...]
Thanks for the information.
I think we as a community need to be more concerned about our public perception
in the future.
Especially in Germany th
Am 20.10.2017 um 23:17 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>> > > I think we as a community need to be more concerned about our
>> public perception in the future.
>>> Especially in Germany there are a lot of articles in which AOO is
>>> poorly presented, currently e. g:
>>> http://www.pr
On Oct 20, 2017 12:20 PM, "Marcus" wrote:
Dear OpenOffice community,
we want to share with you the quoted mail from below:
Yesterday the new Apache OpenOffice 4.1.4 was released.
(due to busy work and technical difficulties I wasn't able to write this in
time, please don'
>
> > > I think we as a community need to be more concerned about our
> public perception in the future.
> >
> > Especially in Germany there are a lot of articles in which AOO is
> > poorly presented, currently e. g:
> > http://www.pro-linux.de/news/1/25256/openoffice-4
Am 20.10.2017 um 22:33 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
> Hello,
>
>> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
>> Dear OpenOffice community,
>> [...]
> Thanks for the information.
>
> I think we as a community need to be more concerned about our public
> perception in the future.
>
> Especially in Germa
Hello,
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
> Dear OpenOffice community,
> [...]
Thanks for the information.
I think we as a community need to be more concerned about our public perception
in the future.
Especially in Germany there are a lot of articles in which AOO is poorly
presen
Dear OpenOffice community,
we want to share with you the quoted mail from below:
Yesterday the new Apache OpenOffice 4.1.4 was released.
(due to busy work and technical difficulties I wasn't able to write this
in time, please don't hold it against me that this comes with one day del
the result was
>carried
>>> out by at least one voter (PMC member or not) for each of the
>>> platforms/bit depths.
>>>> If all three PMC members have success in building on e.g. Linux x64
>>> it does not provide any guarantee for the other platforms (as prov
x64
>it does not provide any guarantee for the other platforms (as proven by
>4.1.4 RC4)
>>
>> We had two PMC providing the community builds. The official release
>is the Source release. We need as much testing as possible of the
>community releases. AOO is a unique project for A
. The official release is the
Source release. We need as much testing as possible of the community releases.
AOO is a unique project for Apache because our users count on the community
builds and not the source releases.
I think we have grown in the last year because in the first years here at
A
o PMC providing the community builds. The official release is
the Source release. We need as much testing as possible of the
community releases. AOO is a unique project for Apache because our
users count on the community builds and not the source releases.
I think we have grown in the last year be
by
>4.1.4 RC4)
>
>We had two PMC providing the community builds. The official release is
>the Source release. We need as much testing as possible of the
>community releases. AOO is a unique project for Apache because our
>users count on the community builds and not the source r
x64 it does
> not provide any guarantee for the other platforms (as proven by 4.1.4 RC4)
We had two PMC providing the community builds. The official release is the
Source release. We need as much testing as possible of the community releases.
AOO is a unique project for Apache because our
Maybe we need to ask for review of
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval at
the same time as looking at the voting process documentation. If taken
literally, a PMC member who cannot do builds from source can't cast a
+1 vote, because their vote is binding and a bin
On 10/18/2017 07:18 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote:
On 19 Oct 2017, at 9:39 am, Carl Marcum wrote:
Question..
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding whether
stated explicitly or not?
Yes,
Gav…
Thanks Gavin !!
-
On 10/18/2017 07:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Carl Marcum wrote:
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
Yes, it should. People add "binding" as a shorthand to mean "I am from
the PMC" since a release cannot be approved without rea
On 10/18/2017 07:16 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 10/18/2017 3:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Question..
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
The vote counting is really only for ASF rule conformance. The way it
really works fo
Carl Marcum wrote:
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
Yes, it should. People add "binding" as a shorthand to mean "I am from
the PMC" since a release cannot be approved without reaching 3 votes
from the PMC, and it must be easy
> On 19 Oct 2017, at 9:39 am, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
>
> Question..
> If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding whether
> stated explicitly or not?
Yes,
Gav…
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubs
On 10/18/2017 3:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 10/18/2017 03:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alon
On 10/18/2017 03:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alone, should be sufficient, imo.
--
Hi Dave, all
I proposed the following new logic on the comdev mailing list.
Who is permitted to vote is, to some extent, a community-specific
thing. However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding
votes, and all other votes are advisory.
Much better with exactly the same meani
tely happens in OpenOffice.
Actually I had already read your presentation. As I mentioned in a
previous email I believe the community currently working on AOO is
healthier and wiser than in the Oracle period. I'm just not sure about
the "Apache way"... Seems like a very strict
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> On 10/18/2017 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too much...
>>> I mean, I highly appreci
On 10/18/2017 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what
they did to justify their +1. But this shouldn't be use
Pedro Lino wrote:
I agree that it is good that some users replicate the building procedure
and confirm that it works. ...
In any case I couldn't find that particular requirement for a PMC member
in the voting page (https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html).
Maybe that is being too strict?
trict?
>
>> (2) Would you name projects where you have felt discouraged? Have you felt
>> discouraged here in past years?
>
> This is the only Apache project I collaborate with (I have been collaborating
> with several other FOSS projects for a long time). Actually just re
ribed here:
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
Marcus
(2) Would you name projects where you have felt discouraged? Have you
felt discouraged here in past years?
This is the only Apache project I collaborate with (I have been
collaborating with several other
s the only Apache project I collaborate with (I have been
collaborating with several other FOSS projects for a long time).
Actually just reading the ASF rules discouraged me to become a committer
(I was invited in the past) and still does.
We know everyone helping is needed. It was great to have a
Hi Pedro,
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>
> On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too much... I
>> mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what they did
On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what
they did to justify their +1. But this shouldn't be used "against" them.
+1 (as a user)
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alone, should be sufficient, imo.
-
2017-10-18 20:02 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti :
> Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>
>> Even though he is a PMC member his vote cannot be counted as binding as
>> he did not build from source as is required by Apache Policy.
>>
>
> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy d
Keith N. McKenna wrote:
Even though he is a PMC member his vote cannot be counted as binding as
he did not build from source as is required by Apache Policy.
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a li
On 10/18/2017 09:29 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
On 10/18/2017 11:49 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
should be included in "binding" .
MzK
"Only the truth will save you now."
-- Ensei Tankado, "Di
On 10/18/2017 11:49 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
> should be included in "binding" .
>
>
> MzK
>
> "Only the truth will save you now."
> -- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortres
Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
should be included in "binding" .
MzK
"Only the truth will save you now."
-- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
On Oct 17, 2017 18:09, "Carl Marcum" wrote:
Voting Resul
Voting Results
+1: 13
0: 0
-1: 0
+1 (non-binding)
Keith N. McKenna (knmc)
Kay Schenk (kschenk)
Larry I. Gusaas
Kazunari Hirano (khirano)
Pedro Lino
+1 (binding)
Jim Jagielski (jim)
Patricia Shanahan (pats)
Matthias Seidel (mseidel)
Mechtilde Stehmann (mechtilde)
Marcus Lange (marcus)
Andrea P
actually released), 4.1.4-RC4 was revoked as GA.
But fear not!
I am calling a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenOffice 4.1.4-RC5
as GA!!
You can find these gems at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.4-RC5/
The vote will last at least the normal 72 hours.
Cheers!
--
Jim Jagielski
I've updated those bz entries.
> On Oct 17, 2017, at 3:09 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> (Later) I would be interested if your changes in the build process would
>> also apply to the Linux64 builds from trunk.
>
> I'm also very happy to learn this is reported by Jim an
Does this call for a change to
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Mac_OS_X
to prevent it in the future?
On 10/17/2017 12:09 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Matthias Seidel wrote:
(Later) I would be interested if your changes in the build process would
al
Matthias Seidel wrote:
(Later) I would be interested if your changes in the build process would
also apply to the Linux64 builds from trunk.
I'm also very happy to learn this is reported by Jim and Dave to be
fixed in the rebuilt RC5!
And indeed I would be uncomfortable in confirming my +1 v
501 - 600 of 2504 matches
Mail list logo
