Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
I am still asking why we need the sub directories under binaries? We
have the file unique already and the language code is part of the file
name. The SDK name is also unique.
They are still handy in case a user wants to browse all available
versions for a given language.
Hi,
I'm using the Eclipse IDE for development and I've svn checked out the
OpenOffice trunk files. Can anyone give me a quick guide or point me to a
link to building in Eclipse as its not mentioned here
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO?
Thanks,
Ajay
Hi,
the preparation of an OepnOffice 4.0 RC is nearly finished and the
upload is currently ongoing.
Mac and Windows are already available and the source release as well.
Linux upload is also ongoing but not yet finished.
Nevertheless the wiki page includes already links for the Linux
packages. I
j...@apache.org has asked for 4.0.0_release_blocker:
Bug 122709: Change default size of application windows on Linux
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122709
--- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org
yes, I changed it back to ?
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as
Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache
OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to
continue the success of OpenOffice.
This release candidate provides the following
+1
Sylvain DENIS
Expert TIC, WEB & FLOSS
Le 12/07/13 11:11, Jürgen Schmidt a écrit :
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as
Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache
OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milest
On 12.07.2013 10:54, Ajay Bhat wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the Eclipse IDE for development and I've svn checked out the
OpenOffice trunk files. Can anyone give me a quick guide or point me to a
link to building in Eclipse as its not mentioned here
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_
Ariel Constenla-Haile has canceled 4.0.0_release_blocker:
Bug 121823: update serf to new version 1.2.1
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121823
--- Additional Comments from Ariel Constenla-Haile
(In reply to h...@apache.org from comment #17)
> It already got in but the issue st
On 12 July 2013 08:47, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 10/07/2013 18:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> I think we should plan on announcing the AOO 4.0 release availability
>> via a website page rather than a blog post. We had issues with the
>> 3.4 and 3.4.1 releases as well, where the load from the announc
Hi All,
We continue doing the AOO 4.0 Final Regression test this week as well as
the defect verification, here is the weekly update (07/08 - 07/12):
*Test execution:*
1. Final Regression test
We have assigned 1804 text executions to about 20 volunteers, and completed
about 68% in execution (1221
+1
On 12/07/2013 10:11, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as
Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache
OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone
Hello,
>The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and
Is it possible to rebuild french language pack for this RC?
We have to do some changes to fix translation errors in Pootle.
However, +1
Thanks
Hi at all
Moment Jürgen. Test a RC and final vote. within 72 houers is unserios.
Pleas give a a full week for this. Else i will vote -1 because there is
not enought time to make the final tests.
Greetings Raphael
Am 12.07.13 11:11, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on
Thanks Yu Zhen to drive the defect verification! It is very important to
ensure all release blocker defects are really fixed.
I noticed that there are 21 resolved release blockers are about
translations. So I forward to I10N mail list and suggest we contribute to
verify and close those items.
19
Rapheal,
I agree that the RC build should be tested.
But I think rather than the time, what we really care should be what is
tested. I'm looking forward Yu Zhen(our QA lead)'s RC test plan. If we get
a satisfiable plan and the test can be finished within 3 days, I will give
my +1 immediately. M
Am 12.07.13 15:30, schrieb Shenfeng Liu:
Rapheal,
I agree that the RC build should be tested.
But I think rather than the time, what we really care should be what is
tested. I'm looking forward Yu Zhen(our QA lead)'s RC test plan. If we get
a satisfiable plan and the test can be finished wi
Thanks for the report, Yu Zhen!
Juergen just annoucned the RC build. Let's call for volunteers and start
the RC build testing!
- Shenfeng (Simon)
2013/7/12 Yuzhen Fan
> Hi All,
>
> We continue doing the AOO 4.0 Final Regression test this week as well as
> the defect verification, here is the
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Hi at all
>
> Moment Jürgen. Test a RC and final vote. within 72 houers is unserios. Pleas
> give a a full week for this. Else i will vote -1 because there is not
> enought time to make the final tests.
>
The previous dev snapshot (rev. 14
please don't discuss in a vote thread
@Raphael, I disagree we do testing on snapshots since weeks.
Juergen
On 7/12/13 3:43 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>> Hi at all
>>
>> Moment Jürgen. Test a RC and final vote. within 72 houers is unserios. Pl
Hi All,
The Release Candidate build is just announced, and we can start doing RC
acceptance test now. This is the call for volunteers on the final tests.
Any one who can contribute to the testing, please send me your TestLink ID
and preferred platforms, and I will assign test cases to you.
The te
What is not serious that I plan a 72 hr vote that is normal at Apache?
We are not loner an incubator project and 72 hr are enough. The RC is
not so much different than the snapshot before.
You can vote -1 if you want but I hope that you take it serious and
don't vote simply and without any real ar
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the preparation of an OepnOffice 4.0 RC is nearly finished and the
> upload is currently ongoing.
>
> Mac and Windows are already available and the source release as well.
> Linux upload is also ongoing but not yet finished.
64 bit
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:10 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> I tried building OpenOffice on the coming Fedora 19 to see how it worked
> with a fairly recent set of build tools. As for STLport, I used the default
> choice for 32-bit systems (this uses the STLPort package from the external
> sources we
I've been doing some extra testing of the AOO 4.0 install over OOo
3.3.0/AOO 3.4.0 and AOO 3.4.1. I also looked at the install over LO
4.0 to makes sure that is clean as well.
So far everything looks great.
One thing I wanted to verify was this directory:
C:\Program Files\OpenOffice.org 3\shar
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Am 12.07.13 16:32, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>
>> What is not serious that I plan a 72 hr vote that is normal at Apache?
>> We are not loner an incubator project and 72 hr are enough. The RC is
>> not so much different than the snapshot befo
Am 12.07.13 16:32, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
What is not serious that I plan a 72 hr vote that is normal at Apache?
We are not loner an incubator project and 72 hr are enough. The RC is
not so much different than the snapshot before.
The point is, who has desided to make a RC? I don't find a single
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> The point is, who has desided to make a RC? I don't find a single
> discoussion about it. A RC should be discused on the list. I know, there
> where serios testings, but for my point of view not enoght. IA2 is
> integrated same days befor,
Does anyone have a script to verify signatures and hashes for a release?
In previous releases I'd download everything and do some ad-hoc
commands, but not as automated as it could be. Since we have a
regular directory structure it should be possible to have a script
that would verify everything a
On Jul 12, 2013 5:12 PM, "Ariel Constenla-Haile" wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Raphael Bircher
wrote:
> > The point is, who has desided to make a RC? I don't find a single
> > discoussion about it. A RC should be discused on the list. I know, there
> > where serios testings, but fo
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:
> On 12.07.2013 10:54, Ajay Bhat wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm using the Eclipse IDE for development and I've svn checked out the
>> OpenOffice trunk files. Can anyone give me a quick guide or point me to a
>> link to building in Eclipse as its no
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the preparation of an OepnOffice 4.0 RC is nearly finished and the
> > upload is currently ongoing.
> >
> > Mac and Windows are already available and the source
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Does anyone have a script to verify signatures and hashes for a release?
>
> In previous releases I'd download everything and do some ad-hoc
> commands, but not as automated as it could be. Since we have a
> regular directory structure it should
In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
this.
Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a "live" document
on the wiki, so we can easily update it with additional information on
known issues
+1 -- buildbot nightlys have been solid for some time.
Still a number of resolved showstoppers ought to be verified, if anyone is
inclined to help knock a few out:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&namedcmd=4.0.0_release_blocker%2B%2C%20Resolved&Bugzilla_restrictlogin=on&sha
Hi List,
I have now played with a self-build pro AOO400 for two days, had no
crash ;-)
+1
Sincerely,
Armin
On 12.07.2013 11:11, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as
Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important rel
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
> In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
> to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
> this.
>
> Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a "live" document
> on the wiki, so we can easily up
On Jul 12, 2013, at 1:18 PM, janI wrote:
> On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
>> to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
>> this.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a
Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
this.
Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a "live" document
on
Am 07/12/2013 09:51 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
I am still asking why we need the sub directories under binaries? We
have the file unique already and the language code is part of the file
name. The SDK name is also unique.
This was discussed more than one time and we fin
On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
> Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
>> On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>> In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
>>> to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
>>> this.
>>>
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 07/12/2013 09:51 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> I am still asking why we need the sub directories under binaries? We
>>> have the file unique already and the language code is part of the file
>>> name. The
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
>
> > Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
> >> On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>
> >>> In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
> >>> to a location on
Am 07/12/2013 09:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
to a location on the website. I'd like to challe
I know this is a developer’s email list, but I'm a user and since this
list is filled with developers I’d like to suggest a macro. I want to be
able to import autocorrect entries from Microsoft word to open office.
I’d gladly donate to this project or even purchase this functionality
for a smal
On 12 July 2013 22:44, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 07/12/2013 09:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
>>
>> Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
>>>
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
In the past we drafted release notes on the wik
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 07/12/2013 09:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
>> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
>>
>>> Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
> In the past we drafted release notes
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:39 PM, janI wrote:
> On 12 July 2013 22:44, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>
>> Am 07/12/2013 09:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
> On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" wrote:
>>
>> > Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
>> >> On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In the past we drafted release n
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> >> On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)"
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
> >> >> On 12 July 2013 18
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Does anyone have a script to verify signatures and hashes for a release?
>
> In previous releases I'd download everything and do some ad-hoc
> commands, but not as automated as it could be. Since we have a
> regular directory structure it should
On Jul 12, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> Does anyone have a script to verify signatures and hashes for a release?
>>
>> In previous releases I'd download everything and do some ad-hoc
>> commands, but not as automated as it
2013/7/12 Jürgen Schmidt
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache
> OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to
> continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This
Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
something on the Traditional Chinese version? Thank you.
On 2013/07/12 21:52, Jürgen Schmidt said:
> please don't discuss in a vote thread
>
>
> @Raphael, I disagree we do testing on snapshots since weeks.
>
> Juergen
>
>
> On
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat wrote:
> Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed
> something on the Traditional Chinese version?
UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/
Regards
--
2013/7/9 Roberto Galoppini
>
>
>
> 2013/7/8 Rob Weir
>
>> On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Roberto Galoppini
>> wrote:
>> > We are updating http://extensions.openoffice.org to tturn on all
>> > enhancements previously made available at the test website.
>> >
>>
>> This is great news, Roberto!
>>
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
wrote:
> 64 bit packages are ready. 32 bit packages are still being uploaded.
All packages are ready now.
Regards
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apac
56 matches
Mail list logo
