Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Robinson Tryon wrote: > > Hmm...a lag of a week in the bibisect repo could be a deal-breaker for > QA members who try to test with daily builds, especially the members > who build LO on their own machines right now. I'm sorry but these are orthogonal issue. 1/ bibisect is to bisect regressions. 2/ bibsect construction right now is not automated (well, except for the monster canonical build box... when it is active) 3/ uploading of daily build is <> of uploading of tar.gz for the purpose of bibisect integration. daily build upload dmg/rpm/deb/msi, whereas for bibisect integration we will upload a tar.gz image of instdir 4/ it is even more unrelated to someone doing his own build. iow: bibisect is not intented to find bug in the bleeding edge.. daily build and self-build are indeed indicated for that. bibisect is to help narrow down a regression that got past automated testing and the bleeding edge manual testing.. > > Tinderboxes do send email, but AFAIK those emails only go to tinderbox > owners or to devs. QA would like to be kept further appraised about > not only builds succeeding, but also whether those builds can run and > function properly. Daily build upload update teh 'current' link on their respective secion in the website. it does that only when it was able to upload a dailybuild that was sucessfully built which is deemed a build that can 'run and function properly'.. if it was know it was not so, it would not be uploaded. > >> but sometimes some tb are out-of-order > > From what I understand, we did not have official TDF tinderboxes for > all major platforms until very recently. As a result, it was difficult > for QA to maintain reliability with volunteer tinderboxes that might > disappear for a while. > > Official TDF tinderboxes are a great improvement in reliability for > us, and will hopefully enjoy great uptime. even 'official' TDF tinderboxes require the love and attention of someone > > I agree that bibisect is not the best tool to detect if a tb is not > currently building. Aside from emailing out, what else can we do to > more promptly triage and address the situation when a (previously > building) tb starts to fail to produce viable builds? I plan to have gerrit buildbot to start to collect information about tb activity in general this could work if bjoern tb3 thing reach fruition... _david_ already added some logging facility in buildbot and the tb3-plugin on gerrit which in turn should allow for activity tracking of the tbs... that won't tell if the build is 'viable' but it will tell if a tb has not build anything at all or not build anyting successfully for some time. Norbert ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Robinson Tryon > wrote: >> >> automatically, I hope? The QA Team has been expecting that daily >> builds would be available promptly in bibisect repos. > > semi-automatically... that is automatically but with human > supervision... has mishap need to be caugh and fixed early > > I imagine that there would be a log of a few days... maybe a week > between the head of a branch and the bibisect repo.. Hmm...a lag of a week in the bibisect repo could be a deal-breaker for QA members who try to test with daily builds, especially the members who build LO on their own machines right now. > if for no other reason that git gc does a better job if it has many > loose object to compact, compression wise > and doing git gcc --aggressive to balance that once in a while is > prohibitively expensive... and as the repo become build, won;t even > run on most machines Could we limit our use of 'git gc' to once a week? >>> This will also allow.. in case a particular patch made the thing >>> unbuildable for a while... to retrospectively re-build that section of >>> the history using a 'patched' version at each step to avoid the the >>> bug the prevented the build to start with... >> >> When you say "re-build," if we're re-building from source, how would >> the tarballs help us? > > because I can rebuild _some_ missing section... and stich the rest > using the tarball > I've been doing that dance for the past 3 weeks building the Mac bibisect As I understand it, we use the content of each tarball as input for a commit in the bibisect repository. Is it merely *easier* to "stitch the rest" together when operating on separate tarballs than on the content of commits in a git repo, or is there actually some important information in the tarball that doesn't make it into the commit? >> My hope with bibisect is that we'll prevent any of the primary builds >> from breaking "for weeks at a time." I think that there are enough >> Win/Mac/Linux people on the QA Team willing to test against the daily >> bibisect repos that we'll notice if the build breaks for even a couple >> of days. > > no it won't. we already have tinderbox that send email when stuff > breaks.. Tinderboxes do send email, but AFAIK those emails only go to tinderbox owners or to devs. QA would like to be kept further appraised about not only builds succeeding, but also whether those builds can run and function properly. > but sometimes some tb are out-of-order >From what I understand, we did not have official TDF tinderboxes for all major platforms until very recently. As a result, it was difficult for QA to maintain reliability with volunteer tinderboxes that might disappear for a while. Official TDF tinderboxes are a great improvement in reliability for us, and will hopefully enjoy great uptime. > sometimes stuff get > overlooked, sometimes shit happens etc... Oh yes -- there are always unexpected problems. If we plan our workflow carefully, I think we can minimize the affect these problems have on our testing and QA process. > iow bibisect will not help us to detect that something does not > build... sicne we build far more often than we aggregate bibisect > build... I believe our latest plan is to add a new build to the bibisect repo daily (or every 50-60 commits). That will give us pretty good granularity to track-down the introduction of a regression. I agree that bibisect is not the best tool to detect if a tb is not currently building. Aside from emailing out, what else can we do to more promptly triage and address the situation when a (previously building) tb starts to fail to produce viable builds? Thanks, --R ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Robinson Tryon wrote: > > You say "the TDF tb box" -- do you mean multiple boxes? yes > >> They will upload their install-dir (tar.gz) in a staging area in tdf infra >> and these will be stitched together later... > > automatically, I hope? The QA Team has been expecting that daily > builds would be available promptly in bibisect repos. semi-automatically... that is automatically but with human supervision... has mishap need to be caugh and fixed early I imagine that there would be a log of a few days... maybe a week between the head of a branch and the bibisect repo.. if for no other reason that git gc does a better job if it has many loose object to compact, compression wise and doing git gcc --aggressive to balance that once in a while is prohibitively expensive... and as the repo become build, won;t even run on most machines > > > Interesting -- I'd assume that it would be roughly as easy to work > with the tarballs as with the commits in the repo. Storing all of > those builds individually might take a bit of space, but if we can > manage it, I don't see a reason not to hang on to the source tarballs. we can't.. 2500 build for the 4-2 dev period... mutliplied by 200MB taht is 500GB for Mac alone and that is just for the period May-December 2013 that is 5GB in a bibisect repo... > >> This will also allow.. in case a particular patch made the thing >> unbuildable for a while... to retrospectively re-build that section of >> the history using a 'patched' version at each step to avoid the the >> bug the prevented the build to start with... > > When you say "re-build," if we're re-building from source, how would > the tarballs help us? because I can rebuild _some_ missing section... and stich the rest using the tarball I've been doing that dance for the past 3 weeks building the Mac bibisect > > > My hope with bibisect is that we'll prevent any of the primary builds > from breaking "for weeks at a time." I think that there are enough > Win/Mac/Linux people on the QA Team willing to test against the daily > bibisect repos that we'll notice if the build breaks for even a couple > of days. no it won't. we already have tinderbox that send email when stuff breaks.. but sometimes some tb are out-of-order, sometimes stuff get overlooked, sometimes shit happens etc... iow bibisect will not help us to detect that something does not build... sicne we build far more often than we aggregate bibisect build... Norbert ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Robinson Tryon > wrote: >> >> I believe that the relationship would be 1 tb building into 1 bibisect >> repo; > > Nope. > I intend to have the TDF tb box build a daily 'for bibisect' build > using a common config > once a day but at different time of the day... You say "the TDF tb box" -- do you mean multiple boxes? > They will upload their install-dir (tar.gz) in a staging area in tdf infra > and these will be stitched together later... automatically, I hope? The QA Team has been expecting that daily builds would be available promptly in bibisect repos. > since they will not upload at the same speed and shit can happen... it > is safer to stage first... so that the stitching can be tweaked. > it is easier to script rebuilding a bibisect in part of in full using > the tar.gz of the build rather than /insert/delete/move some commit > after the fact Interesting -- I'd assume that it would be roughly as easy to work with the tarballs as with the commits in the repo. Storing all of those builds individually might take a bit of space, but if we can manage it, I don't see a reason not to hang on to the source tarballs. > This will also allow.. in case a particular patch made the thing > unbuildable for a while... to retrospectively re-build that section of > the history using a 'patched' version at each step to avoid the the > bug the prevented the build to start with... When you say "re-build," if we're re-building from source, how would the tarballs help us? > I have done this on master covering the 4-2 dev period... where some > patches broke the mac build for weeks at the time (on 10.6). the fixes > where often trivial so a simple git check-out + fix of a single file > was enough to still build... hence avoiding a 500+ commit range > without builds... I agree that we should avoid large commit ranges without builds. My hope with bibisect is that we'll prevent any of the primary builds from breaking "for weeks at a time." I think that there are enough Win/Mac/Linux people on the QA Team willing to test against the daily bibisect repos that we'll notice if the build breaks for even a couple of days. --R ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Robinson Tryon wrote: > > I believe that the relationship would be 1 tb building into 1 bibisect > repo; Nope. I intend to have the TDF tb box build a daily 'for bibisect' build using a common config once a day but at different time of the day... They will upload their install-dir (tar.gz) in a staging area in tdf infra and these will be stitched together later... since they will not upload at the same speed and shit can happen... it is safer to stage first... so that the stitching can be tweaked. it is easier to script rebuilding a bibisect in part of in full using the tar.gz of the build rather than /insert/delete/move some commit after the fact This will also allow.. in case a particular patch made the thing unbuildable for a while... to retrospectively re-build that section of the history using a 'patched' version at each step to avoid the the bug the prevented the build to start with... I have done this on master covering the 4-2 dev period... where some patches broke the mac build for weeks at the time (on 10.6). the fixes where often trivial so a simple git check-out + fix of a single file was enough to still build... hence avoiding a 500+ commit range without builds... Norbert ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Robinson Tryon > wrote: >> Why not have the tb push builds directly into the bibisect repo? >> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/tb#Variables > > because... > > 1/ keeping a local bibisect repo on each tb would be expensive in, if > nothing else, bandwidth I don't know enough about the git sync algorithms to say much here -- I know that git does some de-duplication, but IIRC git doesn't always minimize the amount of data transfered, especially if the repo has been re-packed. > 2/ multiple tb upload stuff.. synchronizing htem can be difficult, > especially with wide variation in upload bandwidth I believe that the relationship would be 1 tb building into 1 bibisect repo; I'm not sure what sync/bandwidth problems we'd run into (aside from what I've mentioned above). Are you suggesting that we might have 2+ tb's feeding into a single bibisect repo? > 3/ the order of commit in the bibisect matter. Right, but don't tb's usually build commits in order? (assuming that we have 1 tb for 1 bibisect repo...) > 4/ experience shows that somethings things break for some minor > details.. being able to fix things an recover using staged build is > useful Being able to curate the particular builds that go into a bibisect repo sounds great to me, as long as we have someone with the time to do that :-) > 5/ having some kind of control over the bibisect buidling as it build > is good. it is easier to do when a centralized script do the job.. > then one can review the log and decide to re-do thing if need be, > before the problem is buried too deep. Again, hand-holding is nice, but I'm not expecting that we'll have the engineering resources to do that with the GNU/Linux and Windows bibisect repos. My understanding is that we'll just add a new build (or two) every day and hope that most of them aren't broken :-) Speaking of which, once we do get daily builds feeding into the bibisect repos, I'm going to try to get QA to test off of those repos as much as possible. That should help us identify regressions much more quickly and allow us to get regression bugs back to the Devs so that they can be fixed before we push out a new release. Cheers, --R ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Robinson Tryon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Norbert Thiebaud > wrote: >> my intention is >> have some tb upload tar.gz installation regularely in a dumping zone >> per platform >> have a cron to regularely.. scrupt these upload zone(*) and >> consolidate things in a bibisect repo > > Why not have the tb push builds directly into the bibisect repo? > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/tb#Variables because... 1/ keeping a local bibisect repo on each tb would be expensive in, if nothing else, bandwidth 2/ multiple tb upload stuff.. synchronizing htem can be difficult, especially with wide variation in upload bandwidth 3/ the order of commit in the bibisect matter. 4/ experience shows that somethings things break for some minor details.. being able to fix things an recover using staged build is useful 5/ having some kind of control over the bibisect buidling as it build is good. it is easier to do when a centralized script do the job.. then one can review the log and decide to re-do thing if need be, before the problem is buried too deep. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > my intention is > have some tb upload tar.gz installation regularely in a dumping zone > per platform > have a cron to regularely.. scrupt these upload zone(*) and > consolidate things in a bibisect repo Why not have the tb push builds directly into the bibisect repo? https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/tb#Variables --R ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
Hi, On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:00:39AM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > Btw, it might be useful to consolidate bibisect related things there... Sounds, it seems Robinson just grabbed fdo#70642, so when hes done there is actually a upload destination for this ;) Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, bjoern wrote: > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 06:04:25PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: >> I just saw that you made this available on gerrit.libreoffice.org, it seems. >> Did you talk to the Infra guys about this? AFAIK, they had severe >> reservations >> about doing such things wrt load and bandwidth on the machine. > > Whops, seems I got that wrong, it appears on Opengrok (why?), so I assumed it > to be hosted on gerrit. Where is it actually hosted? I've asked infra for a space for it... Btw, it might be useful to consolidate bibisect related things there... my intention is have some tb upload tar.gz installation regularely in a dumping zone per platform have a cron to regularely.. scrupt these upload zone(*) and consolidate things in a bibisect repo Norbert (*) but with a delay.. to insure that things stay in order ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
Hi Norbert, all, On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:32:44PM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > Feedback welcomed. It would also be helpful to have: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/HowToBibisect updated with this. This isnt strictly bound to Norbert -- after all there is a lot info in the email already, so any volunteer jumping in to merge that to the page is welcome of course. Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 06:04:25PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: > I just saw that you made this available on gerrit.libreoffice.org, it seems. > Did you talk to the Infra guys about this? AFAIK, they had severe reservations > about doing such things wrt load and bandwidth on the machine. Whops, seems I got that wrong, it appears on Opengrok (why?), so I assumed it to be hosted on gerrit. Where is it actually hosted? Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
Hi Norbert, On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:32:44PM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > I will make it available as annongit clone later.. but due to the size > it is prolly best to do a http download initially anyway. I just saw that you made this available on gerrit.libreoffice.org, it seems. Did you talk to the Infra guys about this? AFAIK, they had severe reservations about doing such things wrt load and bandwidth on the machine. I know: People _should_ download the tarball first ... but people dont always do as they should. Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
Hi, On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:32:44PM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > I have created a bibisect repo that contains all the released > LibreOffice version for MacOSX > from 3.3.0 to 4.1.3 Very cool, we can now do multi platform bibisect! ;) Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] Annouce: Bibisect for MACOSX
Dear QA I have created a bibisect repo that contains all the released LibreOffice version for MacOSX from 3.3.0 to 4.1.3 :~/bibisect_mac_release$ git log --format=oneline 6764e42916679fba49aca76acfb0d0146c1802b3 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.3.2 b99c3afaa75a97fe385f1a4eaee26657423776cd source tag:libreoffice-4.1.3.1 6ef6cacabdd1f20959237ff6539c3029c587c779 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.2.3 413df2d07aaca73b51dba768ead4cb00e63bb110 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.2.2 e96b76e7485ac36071dcc0e5c5b8c1f353e298c8 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.2.1 205bdc03621bb104619d2bdc0eb1a4468e6ecfc8 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.1.2-hotfix1 6c3aaf18099bc1b1c8d520844d3f262208baf71d source tag:libreoffice-4.1.1.1 4249c24dd4130c913752ab3d8c6e6f68fbc57b10 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.0.4 97df88c1260f61d0fba294c67d52746307bf2c58 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.0.3-hotfixes1 641868e39189a35b35f3be58eea9c5e164343c38 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.0.1-buildfix2 b224a76fb5957378eb27fab4949a6855db251d70 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.0.0.beta2 3b3da5b0459799f868c8682054531f0cd104ce07 source tag:libreoffice-4.1.0.0.beta1-buildfix1 473a4054027df523969b28c932a4959021c869ca source tag:libreoffice-4.0.6.2 9034b57701f6f2e3aed901cbc7fb8451c62213b9 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.6.1 7e210e1ae8bb9e1a721af2b8a038d30154c0cbdf source tag:libreoffice-4.0.5.2 7c5ecfb03eae6cdc5874553e4bb19f22aa5ea43a source tag:libreoffice-4.0.5.1 7806b9e796c6e2db576a5d789ac7e18dbbdf7cd9 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.4.2 ea3191feceacac878f9848358996b5f9d1b64339 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.4.1 4c16631aed9255b06894c254b53ea716a758a12e source tag:libreoffice-4.0.3.3 b36a21f9c8f82510568f06e5f28b8ba80b2990c8 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.3.2 f52f462dabb56d2595eef297aa8ac59b445ffe66 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.3.1 e3f24f8aa588e66e3226f39c778f685a19be5ae5 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.2.2 a27422805b2398499fb093594e66f972ae39a94e source tag:libreoffice-4.0.2.1 3f72155092b8f3eb4453c181c1ecb773487a1407 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.1.2 5cdc8ab54502ce0db9df4cd19600cbe7627ad45e source tag:libreoffice-4.0.1.1 ccf2e2a8ad05325cc7f1893a3df3f5b97fcaba52 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.0.3-hotfixes1 80b454888d4ba16480661030ab07a8555a4bf583 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.0.2-buildfix1 8dcaf6efa358387b57928de0dd3ddef6d3b55bfa source tag:libreoffice-4.0.0.1 1b179c7470dba19df676d137f2f5aab8c48a7387 source tag:libreoffice-4.0.0.0.beta1 69b7e3430ed39aa8b861b3eaf8d3442a8171d7f9 source tag:libreoffice-3.6.7.2 d3293c0123e914e551709dbe707a2a99c11790ee source tag:libreoffice-3.6.7.1 2b006cbe42461b336c7abd22370987718180df63 source tag:libreoffice-3.6.6.2 6c617c4efd7299659142ac233052d9ca2393d24f source tag:libreoffice-3.6.6.1 6373c728fa530fd28fc4351db0d2d89398620f1e source tag:libreoffice-3.6.5.2 f5dd641702501b507638d2c8448578f947c73fe7 source tag:libreoffice-3.6.4.3 4516e4c77220e7c4304ee01239c9065c2e02790a source tag:libreoffice-3.6.3.2 32a4fdfdd3b1118032535b3585c36af7969484e0 source tag:libreoffice-3.6.2.2 75403b6c2aead4771dfafcf004a96d962e43cc8e source tag:libreoffice-3.6.1.2-hotfixes1 f438ab78ed6da6028e99217b5112a8b47f7c7011 source tag:libreoffice-3.6.0.4 0c5058a0589b7a81488c51181bce02fe01cb0b2f source tag:libreoffice-3.5.7.2 82c671a306525658048a8d95e3aadce9a2747c42 source tag:libreoffice-3.5.5.3 d7b5fd744d1d0a060e73d3c207cfd863482657d0 source tag:libreoffice-3.5.4.2 63029fe1d87448b21e6890771c7c5c50e0e4fa36 source tag:libreoffice-3.5.3.2 5f9110a8ffb07e5a645dc80d0de0e4d6649857c6 source tag:libreoffice-3.5.2.2 459c156f27d58a525be7b41cf4bbc7f1535882f2 source tag:libreoffice-3.5.1.2 c84e858598e2c0ebdc4b047ae9372d57fc720f5f source tag:libreoffice-3.5.0.3 68d9507319778b630192b1bc5d55b3d6530054fc source tag:libreoffice-3.4.1.1 9c2c333784e46c3b8904aae7dddee54f89e76c1c source tag:libreoffice-3.4.0.1 8232ff86058b23bc4de8bba4b35b12aa83da7696 source tag:libreoffice-3.3.4.1 19bce8b17afa67a9fd27e6ead32a1673eb84ddea source tag:libreoffice-3.3.3.1 fb27222111052dd86acd8dcaa9b18c5e5bf9a1ed source tag:libreoffice-3.3.2.1 8765986c0b813367acffcc6d8d9e6629d84a987b source tag:libreoffice-3.3.0.4 that was built by downloading the dmg out of our website, mounting them and copying LibreOffice.app in the git repo. over time I will add new release... but with some delay for the most current release to keep thinks 'linear' iow I will only add the 4-2 series once 4.1 is out of service and no new release is expected for it that git repo can be downloaded from http://dev-downloads.libreoffice.org/MacOS_Bibibsect/Bibisect_MacOSX10.6%2b_release_lo-3.3.0_to_lo-4.1.tar.bz2 I will make it available as annongit clone later.. but due to the size it is prolly best to do a http download initially anyway. Feedback welcomed. = I am also working (not finished yet) on a bibisec repo to cover master from the tag where we branched the 4-1 branches to the point where we branched 4-2 iow the development period of 4.2 on master...and then add the commit on libreoffice-4-2 branches then I will repeat the process for 4-3 dev... etc... hopefully by then I wil have the scripting in place
