Thats right :)
> On Sep 15, 2018, at 4:07 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
>
> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>
> At lea
+1
On 9/16/18 10:21 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Am 16.09.2018 um 22:08 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
should we change milestone now too?
I did for one issue (already committed)
But the other one hasn't 4.1.6 in the list.
@Marcus:
Maybe you can he
Am 16.09.2018 um 22:08 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
>
> should we change milestone now too?
I did for one issue (already committed)
But the other one hasn't 4.1.6 in the list.
@Marcus:
Maybe you can help (again)?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bu
Odd they are not on my filter list. yea they are fine.
should we change milestone now too?
On 9/16/18 10:02 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
release blocker?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_
Am 16.09.2018 um 21:59 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a
> release blocker?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=74793
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
According to Marcus I could grant them myself.
And I could commit them
No Idea. I have 10 issues on the list. Maybe they do not have a release
blocker?
On 9/16/18 9:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Hi Peter,
Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Awesome! thanks a lot.
+ I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
And I managed to query
Hi Peter,
Am 16.09.2018 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Awesome! thanks a lot.
>
> + I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
>
> And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
> worked them through.
Thanks!
You left two requests (from me) open...
M
Awesome! thanks a lot.
+ I managed to switch my user account to the committer email, yay.
And I managed to query for the flag, and chgecked all suggestions and
worked them through.
On 9/16/18 11:12 AM, Marcus wrote:
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schr
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
Am 15.09.2018 um 20:25 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> I do not have those rights. Probably because my bugzilla user is an account.
> I tried to switch to my apache address but I failed.
> The account name is an leginee account at Google mail service.
Your account must be added to the appropriate groups.
I do not have those rights. Probably because my bugzilla user is an account. I
tried to switch to my apache address but I failed.
The account name is an leginee account at Google mail service.
Am 15. September 2018 10:34:31 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias
Am 15.09.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
> No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
> And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
>
> At least this is my understanding...
T
Am 15.09.2018 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
No, you change to "+" if you think this should be in 4.1.6.
And you change to "-" if you think it shouldn't.
At least this is my understanding...
Regards,
Matthias
>
> On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Sei
Okay for granting I switch from '?' to none?
On 9/14/18 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Okay I had a look now.
I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 repor
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay I had a look now.
>
> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>
> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>
> Are these all of them?
>
>
> - The Patch I had in mind i did not find again.
Hi Andrea,
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> How about this one:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>
> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
> maintenance release and we had r
On 9/10/2018 2:56 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Keith N. McKenna <
> keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna
>>
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Keith N. McKenna <
keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
>
> I had been
On 9/10/2018 12:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
releases.
I just put together a que
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna
> wrote:
>
>>
>> >
>> > I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
>> > releases.
>> >
>> > I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
>> >
On 09/09/2018 Matthias Seidel wrote:
But I know that Andrea wanted to ask for a blocker, but we hadn't
enabled the flag at that time.
It worked now: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127712
Regards,
Andrea.
-
To uns
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018, 15:43 Keith N. McKenna
wrote:
>
> >
> > I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
> > releases.
> >
> > I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
> >
> >
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&list_id=2
>
> I had been constructing release blocker queries for some of the other
> releases.
>
> I just put together a query for the release block requests for 4.1.6 --
>
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&list_id=236879&namedcmd=4.1.6_blocker_requested&remaction=run
> (I didn't do
Hi all --
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> > Okay I had a look now.
> >
> > I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
> >
> > I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 repor
Hi Peter,
Am 09.09.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Okay I had a look now.
>
> I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
>
> I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
>
> Are these all of them?
I don't know your list, can you post the issue numbe
Okay I had a look now.
I have a bit of an issue in filtering on the blocker flag.
I filtered now on the Version 4.1.6-dev and 4.1.6 and found 6 reports.
Are these all of them?
- The Patch I had in mind i did not find again. Next time I have to note
the issue number. :(
Thus I am fine with
Am 07.09.2018 um 14:53 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I am going to hold off until we have some stuff in AOO416, other than
> external lib upgrades, which are different from AOO415
I just wanted to do test builds to see if it builds again after some
patches broke the build process...
No problems at the
I am going to hold off until we have some stuff in AOO416, other than external
lib upgrades, which are different from AOO415
> On Sep 6, 2018, at 2:30 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 06.09.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the R
Am 06.09.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it
> really is one or not ;)
>
> BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
Windows builds (based on r1839814) are up:
https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-416
I plan to have a look on the weekend, what we have now. I want to add one
patch concerning mailmerge.
And then off we go, I Think.
I agree with Jim in general. I see a possibility that the 4.1.x series gets
maintenance till 2020, for centOS6 while every one else is moving to 4.2.0.
Am 6. Sep
Anyone can propose something as a blocker... it's up to the RM on whether it
really is one or not ;)
BTW: I'm ready to go w/ Linux and macOS builds!
> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> For some users, AOO 4.1
Hi Jim,
Am 03.09.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use,
> since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms
> (eg: CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as
> stable
For some users, AOO 4.1.6 will be the "last" version of OO that they can use,
since AOO 4.2.x will not provide some community build for older platforms (eg:
CentOS5,...). As such, I think we need to make 4.1.6 as good and as stable and
as useful, with as many patches and fixes, as feasible for
Hi Andrea,
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> How about this one:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
>> It fixes a typo in the build process.
>
> This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a
> maintenance release and we had r
Matthias Seidel wrote:
How about this one:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
It fixes a typo in the build process.
This one has zero impact for users and, if 4.1.6 was just a maintenance
release and we had regular 4.x major releases, it wouldn't make sense to
include fixes like
Hi Peter,
Am 01.09.2018 um 12:03 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Sorry. I thought I send the answer. Yes Please.
Done!
How about this one:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126736
It fixes a typo in the build process.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Am 1. September 2018 10:07:38 MESZ schrieb Matthia
Sorry. I thought I send the answer. Yes Please.
Am 1. September 2018 10:07:38 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Hi Peter,
>
>any opinion on this one?
>Or should I set the "release blocker" flag in bugzilla for that
>purpose?
>
>Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
>
>Am 29.08.2018 um 18:54 schrieb Matthias Se
Hi Peter,
any opinion on this one?
Or should I set the "release blocker" flag in bugzilla for that purpose?
Regards,
Matthias
Am 29.08.2018 um 18:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 29.08.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> This is a configuration thing. In general I do not ha
Hi Peter,
Am 29.08.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> This is a configuration thing. In general I do not have an issue in adding
> configuration changes to bugfix releases.
> However this one is 16 years old and has been requested in another time and
> context.
>
> I think we should ask the c
Hi Jim,
Am 29.08.2018 um 13:29 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Agreed. Maybe it's a topic of discussion for 4.2.0 but not really suited for
> a patch release (ie: 4.1.6)
>
>> On Aug 28, 2018, at 5:12 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>
>> On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_b
Agreed. Maybe it's a topic of discussion for 4.2.0 but not really suited for a
patch release (ie: 4.1.6)
> On Aug 28, 2018, at 5:12 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
>> This patch could be embedded in this release?
This is a configuration thing. In general I do not have an issue in adding
configuration changes to bugfix releases.
However this one is 16 years old and has been requested in another time and
context.
I think we should ask the community if they like it or not. And since we want
to have some in
On 28/08/2018 FR web forum wrote:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
This patch could be embedded in this release?
I'm not the release manager, so this is just a personal opinion. The
patch swaps the behaviour of two keys (Backspace and Del) and thus
shouldn't be applied to a 4.1.
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=9392
This patch could be embedded in this release?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Hi Andrea,
Am 28.08.2018 um 00:05 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Dictionary updates are no problem and done routinely in every release.
>
> Sure, no problem.
>
>> But I have yet to find the script that updates the version number. ;-)
>
> Here it is:
> https://bz.apache.org/oo
Matthias Seidel wrote:
Dictionary updates are no problem and done routinely in every release.
Sure, no problem.
But I have yet to find the script that updates the version number. ;-)
Here it is:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127639
And its destination if of course somewhere und
Hi Peter,
Am 27.08.2018 um 22:07 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Yes please bumb version number.
> If there is not much complication we could also update the English dictionary.
Dictionary updates are no problem and done routinely in every release.
But I have yet to find the script that updates the vers
Yes please bumb version number.
If there is not much complication we could also update the English dictionary.
Am 27. August 2018 19:18:26 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Hi Peter,
>
>Am 27.08.2018 um 08:35 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>> Thanks Matthias!
>
>You're welcome!
>
>>
>> Am 26. August 2018
Hi Peter,
Am 27.08.2018 um 08:35 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> Thanks Matthias!
You're welcome!
>
> Am 26. August 2018 23:34:25 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
> :
>> Done!
>>
>> Not sure about the script... Is it in devtools?
We should now bump up the version number.
I would like to update the Englis
Thanks Matthias!
Am 26. August 2018 23:34:25 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Done!
>
>Not sure about the script... Is it in devtools?
>
>Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
>
>Am 26.08.2018 um 23:21 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> I could try to create the branch. Just to make sure:
Done!
Not sure about the script... Is it in devtools?
Regards,
Matthias
Am 26.08.2018 um 23:21 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> I could try to create the branch. Just to make sure:
>>
>> svn copy https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO415/
>> https://svn
Matthias Seidel wrote:
I could try to create the branch. Just to make sure:
svn copy https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO415/
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO416/ -m "Branch
off 4.1.6 from HEAD of 4.1.5"
is enough? Or is -r HEAD needed?
Yes, that sh
Hi Andrea,
Am 26.08.2018 um 22:04 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Am 19.08.2018 um 15:13 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>> It does not create branches. So one would, for example, create the
>>> AOO416 branch with an svn copy operation form AOO415, then run the
>>> script locally to
Matthias Seidel wrote:
Am 19.08.2018 um 15:13 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
It does not create branches. So one would, for example, create the
AOO416 branch with an svn copy operation form AOO415, then run the
script locally to update constants and other settings.
Is there a planned date to create t
I would have done already. But the last time I had tried i could not check-in
anything.
So the Idea is asap.
I wrote that I have dissifultiea to progress.
:(
Am 25. August 2018 17:33:09 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Am 19.08.2018 um 15:13 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>
Am 19.08.2018 um 15:13 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Just for better understanding:
>> Does the script create a new branch incl. all needed changes or do we
>> have to branch first and then run the script?
>
> It does not create branches. So one would, for example, create the
Hi,
I submit a patch from Github:
https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/27c0241d4ef1b2cd62c0327e22f48381ff0ce40f.patch
Is it possible to commit in 4.1.6?
- Mail original -
> De: "Jim Jagielski"
> À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Envoyé: Lundi 20 Août 2018 15:3
A good place to start is:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6+Release+Planning
> On Aug 17, 2018, at 1:51 AM, Peter kovacs wrote:
>
> I have managed to make time on the next weekend's. So I volunteer for Release
> Manager. Hope it helps to get this from the table.
>
Great news! If you need any help, don't hesitate to ping me. I believe that as
I went thru the last f
> On Aug 18, 2018, at 11:02 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>
> Yes, the Release Manager role in itself is mostly paperwork and procedures:
> for OpenOffice most of the actual work goes into producing the builds. I hope
> Jim can dust off his CentOS 5 and OS X VMs for "just one last time" once
Peter Kovacs wrote:
However I am not able to access the svn. I can do that with my password
right or do I need to use a passkey?
Password authentication is fine. It's unlikely that your user is banned:
often you will be able to reset your password at id.apache.org
The KEYS file is described
Matthias Seidel wrote:
Just for better understanding:
Does the script create a new branch incl. all needed changes or do we
have to branch first and then run the script?
It does not create branches. So one would, for example, create the
AOO416 branch with an svn copy operation form AOO415, the
Hmpf I think I am banned.
I wrote an email to infra.
On 8/18/18 7:53 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
I try my best.
However I am not able to access the svn. I can do that with my
password right or do I need to use a passkey?
On 8/18/18 5:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Matthias Seidel ha scritto:
Hi Andrea,
Am 18.08.2018 um 17:02 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel ha scritto:
>> Am 17.08.2018 um 07:51 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>>> I have managed to make time on the next weekend's. So I volunteer
>>> for Release Manager. Hope it helps to get this from the table.
>> If there would be a
I try my best.
However I am not able to access the svn. I can do that with my password
right or do I need to use a passkey?
On 8/18/18 5:02 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Matthias Seidel ha scritto:
Am 17.08.2018 um 07:51 schrieb Peter kovacs:
I have managed to make time on the next weekend's.
Matthias Seidel ha scritto:
Am 17.08.2018 um 07:51 schrieb Peter kovacs:
I have managed to make time on the next weekend's. So I volunteer for Release
Manager. Hope it helps to get this from the table.
If there would be a role as Co-Release Manager, I would volunteer for it.
That said, I beli
al -
>>>> De: "Jim Jagielski"
>>>> À: "OOo Apache"
>>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Juillet 2018 15:48:00
>>>> Objet: Re: A 4.1.6 Release
>>>>
>>>> No worries. I have my VMs ready to go.
>>>>
>&
hance.
>
>
>On 25.07.2018 17:18, FR web forum wrote:
>> Regression: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127646
>> This release will fix it?
>>
>> - Mail original -
>>> De: "Jim Jagielski"
>>> À: "OOo Apache"
>>>
Apache"
Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Juillet 2018 15:48:00
Objet: Re: A 4.1.6 Release
No worries. I have my VMs ready to go.
On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:47 AM, Peter kovacs
wrote:
Fyi: To my frustration I failed yesterday to proceed. My next
timeslot is on Wednesday. I hope nothing will interfere.
Am
Yea, whish and reality are still on different parties...
Do we have a template for the cwiki - release tracker? I tried to set
the page up manually and it ended up in something that was not good.
So I guess i did it wrong.
thx
Peter
On 25.07.2018 15:48, Jim Jagielski wrote:
No worries. I hav
Regression: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127646
This release will fix it?
- Mail original -
> De: "Jim Jagielski"
> À: "OOo Apache"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Juillet 2018 15:48:00
> Objet: Re: A 4.1.6 Release
>
> No worries. I have my V
No worries. I have my VMs ready to go.
> On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:47 AM, Peter kovacs wrote:
>
> Fyi: To my frustration I failed yesterday to proceed. My next timeslot is on
> Wednesday. I hope nothing will interfere.
>
> Am 21. Juli 2018 08:28:47 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs :
>> I hope i have ti
Fyi: To my frustration I failed yesterday to proceed. My next timeslot is on
Wednesday. I hope nothing will interfere.
Am 21. Juli 2018 08:28:47 MESZ schrieb Peter Kovacs :
>I hope i have time on Sunday. I wanted to proceed last Sunday but
>failed on this.
>Currently my calendar is kind of full
Am 21.07.2018 um 08:34 schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
I don't think the decision of whether to do a 4.1.7 is something the PMC
can decide, and it won't be until 4.2 is the established field release.
If you get hit with security bugs, you have to fix the field release,
whether you like it or not. Wh
I don't think the decision of whether to do a 4.1.7 is something the PMC
can decide, and it won't be until 4.2 is the established field release.
If you get hit with security bugs, you have to fix the field release,
whether you like it or not. When 4.2 is established in the field, you
will have
I hope i have time on Sunday. I wanted to proceed last Sunday but failed on
this.
Currently my calendar is kind of full. Next possible opportunity is conning
Wednesday.
I am undecided if the 4.1.6 will be the last release. But after 4.1.6 I agree
4.2.0 beta should get priority. I can imagine t
Back to the topic:
If we want to release 4.1.6, we should start the process described here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release
That said, 4.1.6 should really be the last 4.1.x. (my opinion). We have
to get 4.2.0 releasable!
Regards,
Matthias
Am 04.07
Considering the # of macOS related downloads, and the fact that pretty much
every module that is ported to the gbuild system breaks the macOS build
(currently trying to resolve the lingucomponent issues), could I suggest that
we hold off on the dmake->gbuild migration for awhile?
--
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 04.07.2018 um 22:46 schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Marcus wrote:
>>
>> Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>
>>> I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided
that we skip CentOS6
Am 04.07.2018 um 22:46 schrieb Kay Schenk:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Marcus wrote:
Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided
that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument was, if they
want something
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>
>> I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided
>> that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument was, if they
>> want something they should support us. This is no
Am 04.07.2018 um 08:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided
that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument was, if
they want something they should support us. This is not showing sympathy
for a small user group that uses very
I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided
that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument was, if
they want something they should support us. This is not showing sympathy
for a small user group that uses very old software for 2 more years
until they have
What impact has Ant 1.10.x exactly on older machines?
It is no problem for me to build the Windows version with Ant 1.9.12. As
long as we use Java 8.
But again, I just did a personal build to test AOO 4.1.x with Java 8.
Nothing else.
To be more precise: I was the only one who cared. No response fr
The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was no longer supported plus had some
sort of security related issue making it unsuited for AOO... ie, we *needed* to
use Ant 1.10 not just that we now *can* use it.
How about showing some sympathy and understanding for those who may be stuck w/
older mac
Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>
>> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>
>> Hi everbody.
>>
>>
>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage
>> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out
>> to the pe
> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
> Hi everbody.
>
>
> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage
> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out
> to the people.
>
> Matthias has created a suggestion for a
Hi Kay,
Am 01.07.2018 um 23:51 schrieb Kay Schenk:
> Hi *,
>
> If 4.1.6 would contain some needed security fixes, by all means, it
> needs to be released as soon as possible.
>
> Some questions --
>
> Will Java 8 then be the minimum version to use 4.1.6?
> Because Ant is only used for building, t
Am 03.07.2018 um 19:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> As soon as we have a repo branch setup, I'll kick off Linux and macOS builds.
I'll do the Windows builds... ;-)
>
>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Marcus wrote:
>>
>> Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Rele
As soon as we have a repo branch setup, I'll kick off Linux and macOS builds.
> On Jul 3, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
> Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage
>> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta.
Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we
manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff
to get out to the people.
Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security.
Containing so
Hi Peter,
Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Hi everbody.
>
>
> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we
> manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some
> stuff to get out to the people.
>
> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6
On 7/1/2018 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hi everbody.
>
>
> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we
> manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff
> to get out to the people.
>
> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on
Hi Peter,
On 07/01/2018 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
Hi everbody.
I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we
manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some
stuff to get out to the people.
Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release
Works for me...
> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
> Hi everbody.
>
>
> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage
> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out
> to the people.
>
> Matthias has created a su
Hi Kay,
I am not sure but I think the Java Patch and Ant Patch are build related.
The Gstreamer 1.0 API is scheduled for 4.2.0. SO 4.1.6 will still use
gstreamer 4.1.6.
All the best
Peter
On 01.07.2018 23:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
Hi *,
If 4.1.6 would contain some needed security fixes, by
Hi *,
If 4.1.6 would contain some needed security fixes, by all means, it
needs to be released as soon as possible.
Some questions --
Will Java 8 then be the minimum version to use 4.1.6?
Because Ant is only used for building, this should not affect any
end-user requirements, right?
Would 4.1.6
97 matches
Mail list logo
