-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The first Linux builds show that the libreoffice-3.6.4.2 tag created
3.6.4.*1* binaries.
F.
On 27/11/12 15:59, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there have been created the libreoffice-3.6.4.2 tag (aka rc2)[*].
> The corresponding official builds will be
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Hi Michael
>
>
> You want to know the host it was built on ? sounds like a reasonable
> request to me - though it's somewhat unclear how that should be
> configured / propagated from machine to machine.
>
> If the Tinderbox naming followed y
Hi Rainer
Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> I have notes for every download I install
> with additional info concerning tinderbox, pull date and some info else.
> As you can see, I always contribute that info from my notes in my
> reports and comments.
Actually I also keep such a text file. But I fi
Hi Peter, Stephan, *,
Petr Mladek wrote (27-11-12 17:54)
We listen :-) Well, the testing can be done even with Dev builds. I
installed the daily build from
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/Linux-x86_64_11-Release-Configuration/master/current/
and did the following steps:
1. started the
Today new Version 3.6.4.2 rc has been added.
BSA has also been updated
This was in response to Petr's announcement that a tag has been made and
release should be in next few days
Regards,
Joel
--
*Joel Madero*
LibO QA Volunteer
jmadero@gmail.com
Hi Michael
You want to know the host it was built on ? sounds like a reasonable
request to me - though it's somewhat unclear how that should be
configured / propagated from machine to machine.
If the Tinderbox naming followed your own rules
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development
Pedro schrieb:
One year later, after installing (at least under Windows) there is still no
way to know if build
Hi,
yes, current incomplete Info in the about box causes some problems. Not
for me and my normal tests, I have notes for every download I install
with additional info concerning t
Hi Pedro,
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 08:20 -0800, Pedro wrote:
> Almost a year ago I tried to prove to the devs that the daily build naming
> scheme is useless for QA people.
:-)
> (and yes, I know I said it was my final request back then...)
Heh.
> One year later, after installing
Hi Petr, all
Petr Mladek wrote
> We listen :-) Well, the testing can be done even with Dev builds.
I know you do listen. The problem is that I don't have the knowledge and
(most of the time) you don't have the time to act upon it ;)
I already did a similar thing under Windows (renamed the prof
Pedro píše v Út 27. 11. 2012 v 08:20 -0800:
> Hi all
>
> Almost a year ago I tried to prove to the devs that the daily build naming
> scheme is useless for QA people.
>
> (and yes, I know I said it was my final request back then...)
>
> At the time *Lionel* proposed an epoch based naming scheme
Pedro píše v So 24. 11. 2012 v 07:07 -0800:
> Stephan Bergmann-2 wrote
> > I wonder whether it would not
> > make most sense to drop LOdev's special handling of user profiles and
> > instead educate people on how to manually set up an installation's user
> > profile behavior to suit their specif
Hi all
Almost a year ago I tried to prove to the devs that the daily build naming
scheme is useless for QA people.
(and yes, I know I said it was my final request back then...)
At the time *Lionel* proposed an epoch based naming scheme and *Björn*
mentioned a better solution
http://nabble.docume
On 27/11/12 16:54, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 04:07:40PM +, Michael Meeks wrote:
>
>> * CUPS - switching back to PDF output by default ? (Caolan)
>> + need ability to toggle it, have a universal default ? etc.
>> + needs some input to have a PDF / PS toggle f
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 04:07:40PM +, Michael Meeks wrote:
> * CUPS - switching back to PDF output by default ? (Caolan)
> + need ability to toggle it, have a universal default ? etc.
> + needs some input to have a PDF / PS toggle for generation
> AI: + look into adding a UI sett
Hi,
there have been created the libreoffice-3.6.4.2 tag (aka rc2)[*]. The
corresponding official builds will be available within next few days.
It will be used as final if no blocker is found.
See the attached list of changes against 3.6.4.1.
Now, you might switch your current 3-6 source tree to
On 11/27/2012 01:18 AM, billhook wrote:
There are a few bugs being reported by users of 3.5 that have been fixed in
3.6. What should be done with these bug reports? Seeing as the 3.5.7 release
was the last scheduled release for the 3.5 version?
And is there anything in particular we should say t
16 matches
Mail list logo
