Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On 02.08.2012 13:36, Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 01.08.2012 14:56, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. Not necessarily. There are simple technical solutions for this problem: - Copy, don't move, at least the ext_sources/ tree of the repository. The incubator copy can be deleted on our next release. - Use an SVN link to keep the old incubator URL for ext_sources/ alive until the next release. - Wait with the transition of the repository until the next release. I don't see how this solves the Infrastructure policy issue. If I understand it correctly, it is not merely about where in SVN we store these dependencies. The issue is that we have our build script hitting SVN at all. Joe could confirm that. I just wanted to point out that if we find a political consensus then we also have a technical solution for the problem. Besides, I don´t think that the downloading of the tarballs by the build script is a big problem. Most tarballs are checked out together with the rest of the source code from SVN. The build script basically makes sure that none of the tarballs has been deleted in the meantime. The exception, of course, are builds from the source release, that does not contain any tarballs. But with the few downloads of the source release I can not see a problem here either. Last, but not least, bug 120425 is already fixed. All tarballs of the branch and most of trunk are now downloaded - from their original download servers (where I have found them) - first fallback is apache-exrtras - second fallback (will be removed shortly) is the SVN repository. -Andre What if we bundled the cat-a dependencies in the source tarball? Would that work? Same net downloads, but the bandwidth then comes from the mirror network. Independently from this problem, it might be a good idea to have a transition phase after graduation during which both URLs are valid. -Andre -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 02.08.2012 13:36, Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 01.08.2012 14:56, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. Not necessarily. There are simple technical solutions for this problem: - Copy, don't move, at least the ext_sources/ tree of the repository. The incubator copy can be deleted on our next release. - Use an SVN link to keep the old incubator URL for ext_sources/ alive until the next release. - Wait with the transition of the repository until the next release. I don't see how this solves the Infrastructure policy issue. If I understand it correctly, it is not merely about where in SVN we store these dependencies. The issue is that we have our build script hitting SVN at all. Joe could confirm that. I just wanted to point out that if we find a political consensus then we also have a technical solution for the problem. Besides, I don´t think that the downloading of the tarballs by the build script is a big problem. Most tarballs are checked out together with the rest of the source code from SVN. The build script basically makes sure that none of the tarballs has been deleted in the meantime. The exception, of course, are builds from the source release, that does not contain any tarballs. But with the few downloads of the source release I can not see a problem here either. Last, but not least, bug 120425 is already fixed. All tarballs of the branch and most of trunk are now downloaded - from their original download servers (where I have found them) With the way we did it before, the MD5 hash was encoded into the file name, so we could easily detect whether or not the source tarball had been modified. How do we handle that when we now download the tarball from the original download server? Are we including and verifying the expected hashes in the build script? -Rob - first fallback is apache-exrtras - second fallback (will be removed shortly) is the SVN repository. -Andre What if we bundled the cat-a dependencies in the source tarball? Would that work? Same net downloads, but the bandwidth then comes from the mirror network. Independently from this problem, it might be a good idea to have a transition phase after graduation during which both URLs are valid. -Andre -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 01.08.2012 14:56, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. Not necessarily. There are simple technical solutions for this problem: - Copy, don't move, at least the ext_sources/ tree of the repository. The incubator copy can be deleted on our next release. - Use an SVN link to keep the old incubator URL for ext_sources/ alive until the next release. - Wait with the transition of the repository until the next release. I don't see how this solves the Infrastructure policy issue. If I understand it correctly, it is not merely about where in SVN we store these dependencies. The issue is that we have our build script hitting SVN at all. Joe could confirm that. What if we bundled the cat-a dependencies in the source tarball? Would that work? Same net downloads, but the bandwidth then comes from the mirror network. Independently from this problem, it might be a good idea to have a transition phase after graduation during which both URLs are valid. -Andre -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: On 01.08.02 11:33am, Yan Ji said: Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. OK. Thanks. Also please see the attachment below. The icon of Base is missing on Windows 7. I'll still vote for -1 if this issue remains. Three possibilities: 1) The link is wrong, and does not point to the executable. 2) The executable does not contain the icon. 3) This is a case of a corrupt IconCache database in Windows. This is a very common occurrence. If you search Google for windows 7 missing icons site:microsoft.com you will get many hits. The recommended fix from Microsoft is to reset the icon cache, e.g.: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-desktop/windows-7-missing-desktop-application-icons/c031fba8-3e05-4080-89b2-e8a89c460a6b What is not clear is whether this is a Windows bug, or something else that causes the icon cache to be corrupted. I'm creating a Windows 7 VM now. I'll try a fresh install of AOO 3.4.1 on a fresh install of Windows and see if I can reproduce the problem. I did a quick test on a fresh image of Windows XP/SP3 with AOO 3.4.1 r1357911 The icons are fine there. Rebooted and verified they are still fine then. Installing fresh Windows 7 now. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: On 01.08.02 11:33am, Yan Ji said: Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. OK. Thanks. Also please see the attachment below. The icon of Base is missing on Windows 7. I'll still vote for -1 if this issue remains. Three possibilities: 1) The link is wrong, and does not point to the executable. 2) The executable does not contain the icon. 3) This is a case of a corrupt IconCache database in Windows. This is a very common occurrence. If you search Google for windows 7 missing icons site:microsoft.com you will get many hits. The recommended fix from Microsoft is to reset the icon cache, e.g.: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-desktop/windows-7-missing-desktop-application-icons/c031fba8-3e05-4080-89b2-e8a89c460a6b What is not clear is whether this is a Windows bug, or something else that causes the icon cache to be corrupted. I'm creating a Windows 7 VM now. I'll try a fresh install of AOO 3.4.1 on a fresh install of Windows and see if I can reproduce the problem. Regards, -Rob Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji On Aug 2, 2012, at 11:15 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: The Linux x86-64 DEB + Traditional Chinese (zh-TW) download link is broken. I cannot test and vote. -1 until this is fixed. On 01.08.01 08:56pm, Rob Weir said: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob -- 依瑪貓 imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc 旅舍依瑪 http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ 《女聲》電子報 http://www.wov.idv.tw/ 台灣女子自由軟體工作小組 http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids台灣 http://www.educoo.tw/ -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On 01.08.2012 14:56, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. Not necessarily. There are simple technical solutions for this problem: - Copy, don't move, at least the ext_sources/ tree of the repository. The incubator copy can be deleted on our next release. - Use an SVN link to keep the old incubator URL for ext_sources/ alive until the next release. - Wait with the transition of the repository until the next release. Independently from this problem, it might be a good idea to have a transition phase after graduation during which both URLs are valid. -Andre -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On 8/2/12 6:03 AM, imacat wrote: On 01.08.02 11:33am, Yan Ji said: Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. OK. Thanks. Also please see the attachment below. The icon of Base is missing on Windows 7. I'll still vote for -1 if this issue remains. mmh, I read this with mixed feelings. We work as one team on a new release. We find problems, report them, discuss critical ones and propose them as show stopper. Everything is fine. We had several snapshots and I don't know when this problem was introduced and I still don't understand it and where it comes from. I am not aware of any changes here. I am currently checking the latest build on revision r1367911. But I don't like comments like this, if issue XY is not fixed I vote with -1. If people can not fix issues they help with early testing and not only on last minute testing on potential RCs. Sorry but that is not the way I would like to work on the project in a global team. It would have been better if you simply would have proposed this issue as a potential showstopper. We don't have a vote running at the moment. Juergen Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji On Aug 2, 2012, at 11:15 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: The Linux x86-64 DEB + Traditional Chinese (zh-TW) download link is broken. I cannot test and vote. -1 until this is fixed. On 01.08.01 08:56pm, Rob Weir said: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob -- 依瑪貓 imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc 旅舍依瑪 http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ 《女聲》電子報 http://www.wov.idv.tw/ 台灣女子自由軟體工作小組 http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids台灣 http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Aug 1, 2012, at 9:03 PM, imacat wrote: On 01.08.02 11:33am, Yan Ji said: Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. OK. Thanks. Also please see the attachment below. The icon of Base is missing on Windows 7. I'll still vote for -1 if this issue remains. Draw icon is also missing in your screenshot. Have you confirmed that these issues exist when installing to a clean machine? Regards, Dave Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji On Aug 2, 2012, at 11:15 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: The Linux x86-64 DEB + Traditional Chinese (zh-TW) download link is broken. I cannot test and vote. -1 until this is fixed. On 01.08.01 08:56pm, Rob Weir said: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob -- 依瑪貓 imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc 旅舍依瑪 http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ 《女聲》電子報 http://www.wov.idv.tw/ 台灣女子自由軟體工作小組 http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids台灣 http://www.educoo.tw/ -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ ooo-base.png
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On 01.08.02 04:31pm, Jürgen Schmidt said: On 8/2/12 6:03 AM, imacat wrote: On 01.08.02 11:33am, Yan Ji said: Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. OK. Thanks. Also please see the attachment below. The icon of Base is missing on Windows 7. I'll still vote for -1 if this issue remains. mmh, I read this with mixed feelings. We work as one team on a new release. We find problems, report them, discuss critical ones and propose them as show stopper. Everything is fine. We had several snapshots and I don't know when this problem was introduced and I still don't understand it and where it comes from. I am not aware of any changes here. I am currently checking the latest build on revision r1367911. But I don't like comments like this, if issue XY is not fixed I vote with -1. If people can not fix issues they help with early testing and not only on last minute testing on potential RCs. Sorry but that is not the way I would like to work on the project in a global team. It would have been better if you simply would have proposed this issue as a potential showstopper. We don't have a vote running at the moment. You are correct. I'm aware of the problem when I sent my mail, though I couldn't find a better way of talking in a hurry. Thank you for correcting this attitude problem. Anyhow, I would not like to result in the quickstart issue when we release 3.4, that I failed to notice and stop it when I have chance. -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On 31 July 2012 14:59, O.Felka olaf-openoff...@gmx.de wrote: Am 31.07.2012 15:45, schrieb Rob Weir: The only issue I saw is that when we install over 3.3.0 or 3.4.0, we leave behind the older version's unpacked files on the desktop, the files from the earlier install. Those files could be deleted to save disk space. But this is not a regression and is not a critical issue. -Rob It's not a common software behavior to delete old installation files and we shouldn't do that too. Surely that depends on the installation options? If the install is replacing/updating an existing installation, then it should remove any obsolete files. If the install is a parallel installation, then of course it should leave files for existing installs alone. Groetjes, Olaf
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
The Linux x86-64 DEB + Traditional Chinese (zh-TW) download link is broken. I cannot test and vote. -1 until this is fixed. On 01.08.01 08:56pm, Rob Weir said: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob -- 依瑪貓 imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc 旅舍依瑪 http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ 《女聲》電子報 http://www.wov.idv.tw/ 台灣女子自由軟體工作小組 http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids台灣 http://www.educoo.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Hi imacat, Arielch removed the previous RC build, so you cannot continue loading linux package anymore. The new RC build is uploading now, please hold on your test once uploading is complete. Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji On Aug 2, 2012, at 11:15 AM, 依瑪貓 ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: The Linux x86-64 DEB + Traditional Chinese (zh-TW) download link is broken. I cannot test and vote. -1 until this is fixed. On 01.08.01 08:56pm, Rob Weir said: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Andre Fischer a...@a-w-f.de wrote: Hi Joe, On 30.07.2012 19:19, Joe Schaefer wrote: Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Good point. Thanks for reminding me. I have created bug 120425 [1] for copying the category-A tarballs to an external server, apache-extras. I am doing this on trunk because, as I hope you will agree, a micro release is not the right place for such a change. The issue is our svn tree will move after graduation, but there is no redirection like there is with the website. So instead of being in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ we will be in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice or something like that. So those who have downloaded the AOO 3.4.1. source tarball will find that their script breaks. -Rob Andre [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob -- 依瑪貓 imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc 旅舍依瑪 http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ 《女聲》電子報 http://www.wov.idv.tw/ 台灣女子自由軟體工作小組 http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids台灣 http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. I tested these over-install scenarios. They look good. The only issue I saw is that when we install over 3.3.0 or 3.4.0, we leave behind the older version's unpacked files on the desktop, the files from the earlier install. Those files could be deleted to save disk space. But this is not a regression and is not a critical issue. -Rob It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Am 31.07.2012 15:45, schrieb Rob Weir: The only issue I saw is that when we install over 3.3.0 or 3.4.0, we leave behind the older version's unpacked files on the desktop, the files from the earlier install. Those files could be deleted to save disk space. But this is not a regression and is not a critical issue. -Rob It's not a common software behavior to delete old installation files and we shouldn't do that too. Groetjes, Olaf
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Is there any possibility to unpack installation files to system temporary folder. so that system will clean these temp files regularly. 2012/7/31 O.Felka olaf-openoff...@gmx.de Am 31.07.2012 15:45, schrieb Rob Weir: The only issue I saw is that when we install over 3.3.0 or 3.4.0, we leave behind the older version's unpacked files on the desktop, the files from the earlier install. Those files could be deleted to save disk space. But this is not a regression and is not a critical issue. -Rob It's not a common software behavior to delete old installation files and we shouldn't do that too. Groetjes, Olaf -- Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Am 01.08.2012 02:52s, schrieb Ji Yan: Is there any possibility to unpack installation files to system temporary folder. so that system will clean these temp files regularly. The installation files are not temporary files, they are needed for maintenance mode. It's not helpful to delete them. It might be better to delete the download file. Olaf
[VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, a further note for our PPMC members. I have started the vote for 3.4.1 with this email and the vote should happen on the public ooo-dev mailing list. Any QA efforts can and should continue during the voting process. We should also focus on the improvement of the release notes to provide as much as possible useful information why people should update etc. I am not sure how we can include the fix of security issues in the release notes or when the best time is to include this information. The wiki page becomes converted into a static html page with the release. We'll communicate the details of security fixes via the CVE reporting mechanism, after a release is made. Announcements would be made to project's lists including ooo-dev, ooo-users and ooo-announce, as well as to special industry mailing lists for tracking security fixes. But these occur only after a release is made public. I think it is fine to mention generically security fixes in the release notes, along with other generic areas (performance improvements, bug fixes, etc.). But no more detail than that. -Rob Juergen On 7/30/12 5:26 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). This will be our first bug fix release after the AOO 3.4 from May 8th. A further milestone to show that we deliver good and stable software with focus on quality. It will again help to continue the success of OpenOffice.org and will gain confidence in OpenOffice. This time I did not prepare a separate page to highlighting the release candidate. We had developer snapshot since several weeks and the latest one based on revision 1366353 is intended to become released if the voting succeeds. That means and to make it clear you vote here on the final release based on this snapshot build. This release is intended to be a bug fix release and to introduce some further languages: (1) 64 issues are fixed and a detailed list can be watched under http://s.apache.org/Huv. (2) 5 further languages are now officially supported: British English, Khmer, Slovenian, Slovak, and Finnish. For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4.1+Release+Notes. The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 20 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) can be found on the following wiki page: hhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO3.4.1 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). The vote starts now and will be open until: Thursday, 2 August: 2012-08-02 6:00pm UTC+2. After the vote of the PPMC the vote will start on gene...@incubtor.apache.org mailing and will be open for further 72 hours. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
Please be sure to decouple the source builds from downloading artifacts directly from svn.apache.org. I trust that has been done by now as what 3.4.0 did constitutes an infra policy violation, besides complicating eventual graduation moves of your svn tree. Thanks. From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob I will install Linux 32 bit 3.4.1 in upgrade mode rpm -U over my existing 3.4. So, I will again be testing a binary and not building from source. -- MzK I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music. As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool. -- Eddie Van Halen
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating)
2012/7/30 Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com: On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I plan on testing the Release Candidate 3.4.1 on WinXP/SP3, and verifying installing over OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0 and LO 3.5.5. It would be good if others could mention what they intend to look at, so we can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. Also, is the RAT scan results online anywhere? It would be good to review that. Also, if anyone has handy a diff of the NOTICE and LICENSE files from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, that would be good to review as well. -Rob I will install Linux 32 bit 3.4.1 in upgrade mode rpm -U over my existing 3.4. So, I will again be testing a binary and not building from source. Installed the 64 bits binaries (openSUSE 11.4) on top of 3.4.0 with rpm -Uvh *.rpm: everything perfect. No problem with installed extensions and the ES dictionary was automatically updated to the last version. ES localization looks perfect. After that, I installed LanguageTool and it is working fast! Wonderful work! Regards Ricardo
