Hi,
the ooxml-lite module is currently not filtering correctly.
I need to fix that first before continuing with preparing the release candidate.
Andi.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional com
ot;Dominik Stadler" 写道：
Similar for me,
a) good time roll the next release
b) whatever is easier right now, we can also use Ant once again if Gradle
needs a bit more work
c) I'd also opt for 5.1.0, it does not feel like big enough changes for a
major release
Dominik.
On Tue, Aug
Hi,
a) It’s time to release a new version and the new version solves many serious
bugs.
c) My opinion is that 5.1.0 is better.
Best regards,
Sayi
在 2021-09-01 04:28:34，"Dominik Stadler" 写道：
>Similar for me,
>
>a) good time roll the next release
>
>b)
Similar for me,
a) good time roll the next release
b) whatever is easier right now, we can also use Ant once again if Gradle
needs a bit more work
c) I'd also opt for 5.1.0, it does not feel like big enough changes for a
major release
Dominik.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 5:08 PM Alain
1, em 21:11, PJ Fanning
escreveu:
>Hi Andi,
>
>a) I think we need a new release
>
>b) I don't think we need to solve all the build issues before the next
>release
>
>c) I'd prefer to call the next release 6.0.0 or failing that 5.1.0. The
>log4j change makes cal
Hi Andi,
a) I think we need a new release
b) I don't think we need to solve all the build issues before the next release
c) I'd prefer to call the next release 6.0.0 or failing that 5.1.0. The log4j
change makes calling next release 5.0.1 problematic for me.
On Sunday 29 Augus
Hi Devs,
a) what's your opinion about rolling the next release?
From my side, only the distsource build is not implemented in gradle and a few
of the release task need to be done manually.
b) Now that the gradle dist plugin picks up all the dependencies, how important
is the distsource
+1
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 1:12 AM Marius Volkhart wrote:
> +1
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021, 01:04 fannin...@apache.org
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday 3 March 2021, 23:58:38 GMT, Andreas Beeker <
> > kiwiwi...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Devs,
> >
> > as
+1
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021, 01:04 fannin...@apache.org
wrote:
> +1
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 3 March 2021, 23:58:38 GMT, Andreas Beeker <
> kiwiwi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Devs,
>
> as our POI build has some problems, I would at least try to make XmlBeans
> available via maven.org.
>
>
+1
On Wednesday 3 March 2021, 23:58:38 GMT, Andreas Beeker
wrote:
Hi Devs,
as our POI build has some problems, I would at least try to make XmlBeans
available via maven.org.
If no-one objects, I would create a release candidate in the next few days.
The version would be XmlBeans 5.
Hi Devs,
as our POI build has some problems, I would at least try to make XmlBeans
available via maven.org.
If no-one objects, I would create a release candidate in the next few days.
The version would be XmlBeans 5.0.0, as we have changed the logging and the
format/generation of the beans.
A
Hi,
problem seems to be at DrawTextParagraph.java:417, TextLayout.getAdvance()
sometimes returns 0 for OpenJDK. In the statements "(int)Math.ceil(tabSz /
wspace)" the division by zero leads to "Infinity", which Math.ceil()
converts to Integer.MAX_VALUE, thus we try to create a string with that
man
Sorry, I was wrong, it actually only works with JDK 8_201, but fails with
OOM on OpenJKD 8_232, so some change between those two versions of the JDK
might be related.
BTW, CI on Jenkins still uses patch-level 191, which is quite outdated
nowadays...
Dominik.
On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:34 AM Domin
Hi,
target "jenkins" works fine for me with
export ANT_OPTS="-Xmx1024m"
and no changes to the build.xml both with JDK 8_201 and OpenJDK 8_232
Dominik.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 9:01 PM Andreas Beeker wrote:
> I'm running into 4x OOMs when running the integration tests in Open or
> Oracle Jdk 8
I'm running into 4x OOMs when running the integration tests in Open or Oracle
Jdk 8, even when raising the heap from 1512 to 2048 mb.
This didn't happen with OpenJDK 12 - which was my default setting before :|
It looks like there's a problem with XSLF (see below, although this is probably
not th
Hi,
although I've fixed two issues *) locally, I'll postpone those commits after
the release.
So I would roll the release now.
If there are any late-commits ... not a problem, but please inform us before
Dominik and Tim run the integration tests again - not sure if this still makes
sense, as
Hi,
Updated run is at
http://people.apache.org/~centic/poi_regression/reports/index411RC2to412RC2.html
At least some of the failures look like being caused by more coverage in
the testing itself.
All failures are at
http://people.apache.org/~centic/poi_regression/reportsAll/index411RC2to412RC2.h
HI Dominik
thank you for providing the results!
I've asked now several times about the feedback, but to no avail.
So from my side, I can roll a release any time - is there anyone else who wants
to be release manager this time?
Andi
On 28.01.20 00:02, Dominik Stadler wrote:
> Ah, yes, sorry, go
t; wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I'm only waiting for feedback on my EMF stuff, which actually involved
> > >> fixing some SL rendering issu
fixing some SL rendering issues ...
> >> Otherwise I'm fixing sonar issues up till then ...
> >>
> >> Andi
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
..
> >>
> >> Andi
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>> We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the next release of POI
> will
> >>> be available. Any plans?
>
e SL rendering issues ...
> >> Otherwise I'm fixing sonar issues up till then ...
> >>
> >> Andi
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>> We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the next release of POI
> will
> >>> be available. Any plans?
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-3017
> >>>
> >>> Thank you!
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the next release of POI will
>>> be available. Any plans?
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-3017
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>
>>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
up till then ...
>
> Andi
>
>
> On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the next release of POI will
> > be available. Any plans?
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-3017
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
>
>
>
Hi,
I'm only waiting for feedback on my EMF stuff, which actually involved fixing
some SL rendering issues ...
Otherwise I'm fixing sonar issues up till then ...
Andi
On 23.01.20 15:41, Tim Allison wrote:
> Hi All,
> We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the nex
Hi All,
We're getting pinged over on Tika for when the next release of POI will
be available. Any plans?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-3017
Thank you!
weeks, as I'm off for one week now.
Cheers, Andi
On 24.07.19 11:17, Tim Allison wrote:
> Hi All,
>Do we have any sense of when the next release will be? IIRC I have a bit
> of work to do w emf[1], what else do we want to include?
> Thank you!
>
> Cheers,
>
Hi All,
Do we have any sense of when the next release will be? IIRC I have a bit
of work to do w emf[1], what else do we want to include?
Thank you!
Cheers,
Tim
[1] I have a vague memory of slight regressions in text extraction, but I
have to test w latest.
Hi,
The first link actually compared current 4.1.0 to "4.0.2-SNAPSHOT", i.e.
some intermediate version. I have now re-run the comparison against 4.0.1
(called 4.0.1RC2 in my database), results are similar, but not fully equal.
The new comparison is available at the following links:
- 4.0.1-RC
When was the previous regression run?
Some of the formula errors mention invalid sheet names, including
empty strings. The fix for #60460 committed Dec. 30 handled null
sheet names in SheetNameEvaluator, but perhaps that change should also
check and handle empty strings?
I've never actually touc
A first run of the regression tests for Apache POI is done. It still uses
XMLBeans 3.0.2, I will re-run a 2nd time later when we have XmlBeans 3.0.3
final available.
There are new failures with a high amount of failing documents compared to
4.0.x, however these are caused by the addition of a call
For xmlbeans, I would recommend getting the release jars and zips from
https://builds.apache.org/view/P/view/POI/job/POI-XMLBeans-DSL-1.6/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/build/
This guarantees the jars were built with Java 6.
For the nexus release, I follow this guide:
https://central.sonatype.org/p
Hi Greg,
> 1. what work remains before releasing a new XMLBeans?
I'm not committing to trunk currently, but to a branch. I'm not planning to
include my changes in the current release, as I haven't tested them yet
thoroughly.
> 2. How do I build, tag, and release XMLBeans?
tag: via svn
build:
OK, I think I'm reasonably familiar now with the POI release build
process, thank you to all who have contributed to the detailed
release-guide.txt.
However, there is no such document I can find for XMLBeans, and it
sounds like there may be an open question or two there?
Further, if I'm reading t
I've dropped the xmlbeans staging jars.
--
Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.o
On 18.03.19 06:11, Greg Woolsey wrote:
> I've not done a release yet, but I'd be willing to read the docs and
> take a stab at it if no one else has time.
Regarding POI:
After setting up the environment - its merely calling the release-prep* scripts.
I haven't yet updated the link to commons-open
org_apache_xmlbeans to a real package and being
> compatible to former releases - and it gives me a bit of a hard time.
>
> But nevertheless we might want push the next release for POI and XmlBeans.
>
> I'm busy next week, but could take care about the releases the week
> aft
s to a real package and being
> compatible to former releases - and it gives me a bit of a hard time.
> >
> > But nevertheless we might want push the next release for POI and
> XmlBeans.
> >
> > I'm busy next week, but could take care about the releases the week
> a
fit for Java 9+ - i.e. moving the
> resources from /schemaorg_apache_xmlbeans to a real package and being
> compatible to former releases - and it gives me a bit of a hard time.
>
> But nevertheless we might want push the next release for POI and XmlBeans.
>
> I'm busy next w
Hi *,
I'm currently working on getting XmlBeans fit for Java 9+ - i.e. moving the
resources from /schemaorg_apache_xmlbeans to a real package and being
compatible to former releases - and it gives me a bit of a hard time.
But nevertheless we might want push the next release for PO
fix for #54916 in the next release, as this
affects most xml-based formats.
I've proposed a solution in the bug entry and would be happy to discuss it.
Apart of that, I'm working on (/ trying to) porting the XML signing of the
current eID applet codebase to POI without the library lim
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
I won't have time to do it on this go around, but is there any sense of
when the next release might be? Thank you.
Based on a couple of posts to private@, I think there were two bugs that
were felt to be "must fix" before the nex
All,
I won't have time to do it on this go around, but is there any sense of when
the next release might be? Thank you.
Best,
Tim
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For addit
...@gagravarr.org]
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 8:33 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: Next release?
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013, cedric walter wrote:
> I have 13 patches still to merge in the trunk (all being new formulas)
> with 7 formulas more that will be soon also ready. I am ready to start
> c
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013, cedric walter wrote:
I have 13 patches still to merge in the trunk (all being new formulas)
with 7 formulas more that will be soon also ready. I am ready to start
committing them this week. Should I now wait after the delivery of
Tueday 27 August?
As it's only another bet
the vote passes.
> Does this sound reasonable?
>
> Best,
>
> Tim
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:34 AM
> To: POI Developers List
> Subject: Next release?
>
> Hi All
&
reasonable?
Best,
Tim
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:34 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Next release?
Hi All
It has been about 3 weeks now since the 3.10 beta 1 release. We've had a
handful of
Doh! Sorry. Will start on the pre-reqs now.
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:apa...@gagravarr.org]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 10:57 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: RE: Next release?
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
> I'd be willing to learn this
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
I'd be willing to learn this process and give beta2 a shot probably in
the middle of this coming week. Would that be soon enough? Any
pointers/documentation on the steps required?
There's quite a bit in the docs area of the site:
https://svn.ap
>If it's me again, I'd likely push for 3.10 final fairly soon. If it's
>someone else trying it for the first time, I'd suggest they roll beta 2
>immediately to practice the release process with, then the 3.10 final in a
>few weeks. Any takers?
Nick,
I'd be willing to learn this process and
On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, vlad dev wrote:
I would really appreciate if the patch for POI 55294 would be included in
the next release.
Can I do something more to make it happen?
See my message yesterday for advice:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/poi-dev/201307.mbox/%3Calpine.DEB
I would really appreciate if the patch for POI 55294 would be included in
the next release.
Can I do something more to make it happen?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
>
>> My personal preference would be to wait
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
My personal preference would be to wait for the POI 55292 patch to be
applied (so that we can also fix Tika-1100). I'll have a chance to
review it and its updates tomorrow (I hope), and if the community agrees
with any mods I might have, I'll try
ubject: Re: Next release?
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Dominik Stadler wrote:
> Doing bugfixes in these areas seems likely to cause other issues and
> thus for me is not ideal at the end of a release phase. In both cases I
> would rather discuss if we can refactor the implementation more
> radical
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, Darren Roberts wrote:
Having only submitted one very minor patch (54969, but I'm working on a
major enhancement to XSSFTextBox at the moment) my opinion probably
doesn't count for much, but my vote would be to have a push to include
as many of the outstanding patches in bug
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Dominik Stadler wrote:
Doing bugfixes in these areas seems likely to cause other issues and
thus for me is not ideal at the end of a release phase. In both cases I
would rather discuss if we can refactor the implementation more
radically to fix the areas in the long run.
outstanding patches in bugzilla into a beta2 as possible.
>
> Thanks
> Darren
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > From: Nick Burch
> >To: POI Developers List
> >Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:33 PM
> >Subject: Next release?
e.
Thanks
Darren
>
> From: Nick Burch
>To: POI Developers List
>Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:33 PM
>Subject: Next release?
>
>
>Hi All
>
>It has been about 3 weeks now since the 3.10 beta 1 release. We've had a
>hand
Hi All
It has been about 3 weeks now since the 3.10 beta 1 release. We've had a
handful of bugs fixed then, but nothing major. Quite a few patches still
outstanding in bugzilla though...
What do we think about another release? 3.10 final? beta 2 to give time
to apply a few more patches? Some
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
>>
>> I would like to schedule the release date on the 28th of August, this is
>> the date when the first ever 0.1 alpha release of Apache POI went out in
>> 2001 and it means we will be celebrating 10th
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
I would like to schedule the release date on the 28th of August, this is
the date when the first ever 0.1 alpha release of Apache POI went out in
2001 and it means we will be celebrating 10th anniversary of the POI
project! I'm working on a press release
Hi All
There has been quite a lot of bug fixes and new features since
3.8-beta3 and I think it is time for another release.
I would like to schedule the release date on the 28th of August, this
is the date when the first ever 0.1 alpha release of Apache POI went
out in 2001 and it means we will b
62 matches
Mail list logo
