+1
> On Jan 26, 2023, at 10:09 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I think we can all agree on a 4 week (30 days) period for archiving the
> binaries?
>
> Looking at:
>
> https://nightlies.apache.org/openoffice/install/linux64/?C=M;O=D
>
> we should also think about shortening the
Hi all
> On 01/26/2023 4:24 PM WET Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> > Four weeks are a good period to have archived if a regression occurs.
> >
> >
> No. For old regressions, or to discover old fixes, we ideally want a build
> from every month in AOO's history.
I agree with both.
Four weeks is a good
On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 3:14 PM Matthias Seidel
wrote:
>
> Four weeks are a good period to have archived if a regression occurs.
>
>
No. For old regressions, or to discover old fixes, we ideally want a build
from every month in AOO's history.
Am 26.01.23 um 16:49 schrieb Carl Marcum:
On 1/26/23 10:09 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
I think we can all agree on a 4 week (30 days) period for archiving the
binaries?
4 weeks max seems fine to me.
for me also, when the build is always done, independent of a commit.
And if possible only
Hi Matthias and All,
On 1/26/23 10:09 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Hi all,
I think we can all agree on a 4 week (30 days) period for archiving the
binaries?
4 weeks max seems fine to me.
And if possible only build one if there was a commit.
For Linux I build my own anyway. I really need mac
Hi all,
I think we can all agree on a 4 week (30 days) period for archiving the
binaries?
Looking at:
https://nightlies.apache.org/openoffice/install/linux64/?C=M;O=D
we should also think about shortening the filenames. For example the Git
hash could be reduced to the first 10 digits.
Opinion
The output from git --log can be filtered to a since date. If we use the last
build date then we can check if there are entries.
Maybe some other switches would help.
Am 21. Januar 2023 15:03:02 MEZ schrieb Matthias Seidel
:
>Hi Gavin,
>
>Am 21.01.23 um 13:33 schrieb Gavin McDonald:
>> Hi All,
>
Hi Gavin,
Am 21.01.23 um 13:33 schrieb Gavin McDonald:
> Hi All,
>
> The nightly builds at https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/58 are using up
> much unnecessary
> disk space on the nightlies.apache.org server.
>
> Currently Openoffice alone is using more than 1TB - all due to these
> nightly builds
Hi Rory,
Am 21.01.23 um 14:18 schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 14:13:54 +0100
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>
>> Hi Rory,
>>
>> Am 21.01.23 um 13:52 schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:33:38 +0100
>>> Gavin McDonald wrote:
>>>
Hi All,
The nightly builds at h
On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 14:13:54 +0100
Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Rory,
>
> Am 21.01.23 um 13:52 schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
> > On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:33:38 +0100
> > Gavin McDonald wrote:
> >
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> The nightly builds at https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/58 are using up
> >> much unn
Hi Rory,
Am 21.01.23 um 13:52 schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:33:38 +0100
> Gavin McDonald wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The nightly builds at https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/58 are using up
>> much unnecessary
>> disk space on the nightlies.apache.org server.
>>
>> Currently Openo
On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:33:38 +0100
Gavin McDonald wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The nightly builds at https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/58 are using up
> much unnecessary
> disk space on the nightlies.apache.org server.
>
> Currently Openoffice alone is using more than 1TB - all due to these
> nightly b
Sure it should, but these reference should be rewritten. Rather than email
webmaster@ I've submitted an INFRA JIRA issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-20258
Here is the wiki page about OpenOffice nightlies:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Buildbot+info
> On
Hi,
>
>And yet if a path is mentioned in the "ASF policy on software releases",
that path should exist.
>
That was exactly my point. It is solely up to ASF to decide what kind of
information user shall see at the target page.
"Not Found. The requested URL was not found on this server." is hardly
Hi Dave
> It should be made clear that nightly builds are not required and not
> advertised. The location and frequency is up to the project and is found by
> asking on a project’s dev list.
And yet if a path is mentioned in the "ASF policy on software releases", that
path should exist.
Curio
It should be made clear that nightly builds are not required and not
advertised. The location and frequency is up to the project and is found by
asking on a project’s dev list.
See Jim and Matthias’s discussion about weekly builds.
Best Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 12, 2020, at
Hi,
Thanks for explanation. I'll report this issue.
Let me/us hope it is not "a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an
enigma". ;‑)
Best regards,
Czesław
Am Di., 12. Mai 2020 um 16:02 Uhr schrieb Pedro Lino :
> Hi Czeslaw
>
> > In case of "Nightly Builds":
> > http://www.apache.org/legal/rel
Hi Czeslaw
> In case of "Nightly Builds":
> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#build-directories
> their location is given as follows: people.apache.org/builds
>
> It doesn't work ("Not Found. "The requested URL was not found on this
> server.").
>
> Can that be rectified?
Given t
Sorry for the noise,
Now it works
Mechtilde
Am 17.02.2013 09:38, schrieb Mechtilde:
> Hello
>
> where can I get an actual nightly build for testing for a 64 bit
> Linux-System (favoured DEBs)
>
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#linux64 gives a 404
>
> Kind regards
>
> Mechtilde
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
