4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
62 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Rory O'Farrell
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:25:43 +0200
Peter kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's sad news. :(
>
> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.)
> However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement.
>
> If that's fine for all.
>
> One sidenote for all. We need to explain the situation somehow if we do not sneak the patch in. ( it seems to be a small thing )
>
> All the best
>  peter


Put the patch in and call the release 4.1.4a.  Delete existing 4.1.4 versions.

Rory

>
> Am 10. Oktober 2017 17:04:14 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]>:
> >To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present
> >to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After
> >being away at confs for ~3weeks, I have quite a bit of a backlog.
> >
> >Who wants to take over. I still am signing up to do the macOS and
> >Linux 32/64 bit builds.
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Jim Jagielski
Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:25:43 +0200
> Peter kovacs <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>> That's sad news. :(
>>
>> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.)
>> However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement.
>>
>> If that's fine for all.
>>
>> One sidenote for all. We need to explain the situation somehow if we do not sneak the patch in. ( it seems to be a small thing )
>>
>> All the best
>> peter
>
>
> Put the patch in and call the release 4.1.4a.  Delete existing 4.1.4 versions.
>
> Rory
>
>>
>> Am 10. Oktober 2017 17:04:14 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]>:
>>> To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present
>>> to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After
>>> being away at confs for ~3weeks, I have quite a bit of a backlog.
>>>
>>> Who wants to take over. I still am signing up to do the macOS and
>>> Linux 32/64 bit builds.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Rory O'Farrell
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400
Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?


Does it matter? There is a first time for everything.  Why throw all the 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5?  
Or call it 4.1.4.1

Rory

>
> > On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:25:43 +0200
> > Peter kovacs <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >
> >> That's sad news. :(
> >>
> >> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.)
> >> However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement.
> >>
> >> If that's fine for all.
> >>
> >> One sidenote for all. We need to explain the situation somehow if we do not sneak the patch in. ( it seems to be a small thing )
> >>
> >> All the best
> >> peter
> >
> >
> > Put the patch in and call the release 4.1.4a.  Delete existing 4.1.4 versions.
> >
> > Rory
> >
> >>
> >> Am 10. Oktober 2017 17:04:14 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]>:
> >>> To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present
> >>> to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After
> >>> being away at confs for ~3weeks, I have quite a bit of a backlog.
> >>>
> >>> Who wants to take over. I still am signing up to do the macOS and
> >>> Linux 32/64 bit builds.
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>


--
Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Mathias Röllig

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Mathias Röllig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello Raphael!
>
> Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
> > I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and
> > release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds
> > with > the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick
> > within the ASF policy.
>
> A patch for *all* platforms must also be tested in all ways. So I think, this way isn't an easy and good way.
> Simply let 4.1.4 as is but don't let it (official) free.
> Create a 4.1.5-RC1 (or maybe 4.1.4-RC5 if possible) with this patch, and if no further errors announce 4.1.5.
>

IMO, this does seem like the most prudent way. Yes, it increases *our*
workload, but it also is the most transparent and prudent for our end-users
and any ISVs. For better or worse, ASF source code tags are immutable
since they are the things that "define" a release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Peter kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> That's sad news. :(
>
> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.)
> However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement.
>

IMO, it would be better to have someone step up asap... if no one does, or
can, I may be able to move some things around...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Fernando Cassia
In reply to this post by Rory O'Farrell
On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400
> Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?
>
>
> Does it matter? There is a first time for everything.  Why throw all the
> 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5?
> Or call it 4.1.4.1
>
> Rory

+1

FC

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Matthias Seidel
Either way we would have to update the metadata:

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127168

It would be quite risky to introduce a fourth digit without testing at
this stage...

Matthias


Am 10.10.2017 um 18:01 schrieb Fernando Cassia:

> On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400
>> Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?
>>
>> Does it matter? There is a first time for everything.  Why throw all the
>> 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5?
>> Or call it 4.1.4.1
>>
>> Rory
> +1
>
> FC
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.4 RC4: synchronize labels don't work on MacOS

Matthias Seidel
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
+1

Matthias

Am 10.10.2017 um 13:28 schrieb Peter kovacs:

> Can we document the issue in bugzilla?
> Plus maybe link this discussion in it?
>
> Am 10. Oktober 2017 12:54:41 MESZ schrieb Pedro Lino <[hidden email]>:
>>> I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment,
>> based
>>>     on trunk but with some 4.1.4 changes added. I need to get some
>> more
>>>     sleep before serious debug (it is 2:08 a.m. here). Could someone
>> check
>>>     whether it happens in the unmodified trunk? That would narrow it
>> down.
>>
>> I confirm that I can replicate the problem in 4.1.4 RC4 under Windows 7
>> but not when using 4.2.0 (build 1811013)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Rory O'Farrell

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:59 AM, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400
> Jim Jagielski <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?
>
>
> Does it matter? There is a first time for everything.  Why throw all the 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5?  
> Or call it 4.1.4.1
>

I'm confused. How does calling it 4.1.4.1 or 4.1.4a or even 4.1.4buffalo help?

What exactly does it make easier? We still need to rebuild. And it
doesn't even help w/ the Wiki pages that would need to be renamed.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Matthias Seidel
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Rest assured that I am on standby for the Windows builds!

Whatever version it will be...


Am 10.10.2017 um 17:04 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

> To be honest, I really don't think I have the time or energy at present
> to continue on as RM for the 4.1.x stuff, no matter what we do. After
> being away at confs for ~3weeks, I have quite a bit of a backlog.
>
> Who wants to take over. I still am signing up to do the macOS and
> Linux 32/64 bit builds.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Jim Jagielski
I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want
us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama (which
is very, very tiring).

As I said, if I stay on, and am still "picked" as RM, my plan would
be to simply move on to 4.1.5 which is, at this state, the EXACT same
as the AOO414 tag w/ the exception related to the version numbering.

But I want/need feedback from the group if I should stay or if someone
is willing to take up semi-immediately.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Kay Schenk-2
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Hi all --

It's true that changing from 4.1.4 to 4.1.5 requires a bit of work, but
really not all that much. It would be better to have Jim continue as RM
regardless IMO and others can pitch in. Once the branch is copied to
4.1.5, others can pitch in to do version updates. Non-committers  can
submit patches toward this endeavor.

I will still help with collecting bugs and resolutions toward this.

On 10/10/2017 09:00 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

>
>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Peter kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> That's sad news. :(
>>
>> I have no time until 20th. I would sign up for RM for 4.2.0. (And optional 4.1.5 if we decide for this approach.)
>> However I would not do any building only the organisational part of collecting bugs and tracking / triggering the advancement.
>>
>
> IMO, it would be better to have someone step up asap... if no one does, or
> can, I may be able to move some things around...
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

--
------------------------------------------
MzK

"Only the truth will save you now."
       -- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Patricia Shanahan
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
I hope you will stay on. I am not sure I would have made the same
decision as you about the release number, but in my opinion part of the
RM role is bike-shedding prevention by making decisions.

I hope that the need to test the patch ASAP does not get lost in the
discussion of what to call it.



On 10/10/2017 9:50 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't want
> us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama (which
> is very, very tiring).
>
> As I said, if I stay on, and am still "picked" as RM, my plan would
> be to simply move on to 4.1.5 which is, at this state, the EXACT same
> as the AOO414 tag w/ the exception related to the version numbering.
>
> But I want/need feedback from the group if I should stay or if someone
> is willing to take up semi-immediately.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

AOO415 branch created

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Kay Schenk-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by Patricia Shanahan
I support Jim as release manager. I see no big issues, that we can not solve together.

I can take over at 4.1.5, if needed, but not before. I am sorry. Because currently I am not up to date about the release and have time restraints until 20th.

For 4.1.5 we need to communicate, explain the situation. And we should think also more about timelines.

All the best
Peter

Am 10. Oktober 2017 19:21:25 MESZ schrieb Patricia Shanahan <[hidden email]>:

>I hope you will stay on. I am not sure I would have made the same
>decision as you about the release number, but in my opinion part of the
>
>RM role is bike-shedding prevention by making decisions.
>
>I hope that the need to test the patch ASAP does not get lost in the
>discussion of what to call it.
>
>
>
>On 10/10/2017 9:50 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't
>want
>> us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama (which
>> is very, very tiring).
>>
>> As I said, if I stay on, and am still "picked" as RM, my plan would
>> be to simply move on to 4.1.5 which is, at this state, the EXACT same
>> as the AOO414 tag w/ the exception related to the version numbering.
>>
>> But I want/need feedback from the group if I should stay or if
>someone
>> is willing to take up semi-immediately.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Marcus (OOo)
Am 10.10.2017 um 19:40 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> I support Jim as release manager. I see no big issues, that we can not solve together.

I also want that Jim continous as RM.

@Jim:
Please remember that it's allowed to ask for help when you see much work
and less time on your side. ;-)

Marcus



> Am 10. Oktober 2017 19:21:25 MESZ schrieb Patricia Shanahan <[hidden email]>:
>> I hope you will stay on. I am not sure I would have made the same
>> decision as you about the release number, but in my opinion part of the
>>
>> RM role is bike-shedding prevention by making decisions.
>>
>> I hope that the need to test the patch ASAP does not get lost in the
>> discussion of what to call it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/2017 9:50 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I feel bad leaving RM at this stage... we are so close, and I don't
>> want
>>> us to lose momentum. But I also don't want there to be drama (which
>>> is very, very tiring).
>>>
>>> As I said, if I stay on, and am still "picked" as RM, my plan would
>>> be to simply move on to 4.1.5 which is, at this state, the EXACT same
>>> as the AOO414 tag w/ the exception related to the version numbering.
>>>
>>> But I want/need feedback from the group if I should stay or if
>> someone
>>> is willing to take up semi-immediately.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Resigning as RM for 4.1.x

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia
Am 10.10.2017 um 18:01 schrieb Fernando Cassia:

> On 10/10/17, Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:54 -0400
>> Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Have we ever released a X.Y.Za?
>>
>>
>> Does it matter? There is a first time for everything.  Why throw all the
>> 4.1.4 work away and start again with 4.1.5?
>> Or call it 4.1.4.1
>>
>> Rory
>
> +1

-1

Every version numbering else than x.y.z is not working with our download
script.

And no, it doesn't make sense to invest hours to adjust it only to
support this one-time-thing. ;-)

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Raphael Bircher-3
Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
> I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and
> release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds with
> the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick within the
> ASF policy.

in theory this could work.

When we look at the history of OpenOffice we haven't released and
communicated patches for, puh, maybe at least 10 years.

At the end we would put the responsibility to our users to find,
download, understand and install the patch. I bet that the most of our
average users will get stuck somewhere in the steps.

Creating an self-extracting and -installing patch for all platforms is
an enormous effort. Therefore I don't think that we should follow this way.

My 2ct.

Marcus



> Am .10.2017, 16:35 Uhr, schrieb Jim Jagielski <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Once something is tagged it is public. It is official. Removing and/or
>> adjusting tags is something that we cannot and should not do. It is
>> really against ASF policy since it destroys an accurate representation
>> of our history and IP provenance.
>>
>> If someone wishes to take over as RM, I am fine with that. I will
>> still produce the required builds. But as long as I'm RM, I can't
>> abide by "rewriting" history re: 4.1.4... But like I said, I'm OK
>> w/ someone taking over as RM and will follow their direction
>> whatever it is.
>>
>>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Andrea Pescetti <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will
>>>> wait for
>>>> a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to
>>>> start the process for AOO-415
>>>
>>> We are still in time for retiring 4.1.4-RC4 (not 4.1.4 altogether).
>>>
>>> Builds are on SourceForge but they've never been distributed and they
>>> can be replaced by new builds.
>>>
>>> 4.1.4 is tagged but SVN tags can be deleted and recreated. Not best
>>> practice, but surely feasible.
>>>
>>> Remember that the amount of code changes needed to produce something
>>> named 4.1.5 is quite significant and very much error-prone. Take a
>>> look at the relevant issues in case, but for a "quick fix" I would
>>> definitely stick to 4.1.4, produce 4.1.4-RC5 and vote on RC5, while
>>> undoing what we did for 4.1.4-RC4.
>>>
>>> Note: I'm writing all of the above without having had the time to
>>> look at the patch or test. I'll do that this evening, European time.
>>> I have still to understand the importance of this bug too - I assume
>>> this affects potentially many users, otherwise we can go the slippery
>>> way of "fix just another small bug" for ages.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>  Andrea.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Am 10.10.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> The reason is that we have *TAGGED* 4.1.4. :(

sad but true, also here we have big bug in our cook book. So, no blame
to you. ;-)

Creating the SVN tag must not happen as long as the release is not
public on servers and communicated to the world.

I'll fix this in the Wiki.

Marcus



>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:56 AM, Patricia Shanahan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Why the need to bump the release number, rather than kill RC4 and build RC5?
>>
>> On 10/10/2017 5:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> Thx again!
>>> Considering this issue, this means that 4.1.4 is also DOA. I will wait for
>>> a few more hours, for West Coast to get online but my plan is to
>>> start the process for AOO-415
>>>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 8:16 AM, Patricia Shanahan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The attached patch fixes this, as well as the business card case.
>>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2017 2:59 AM, Mathias Röllig wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>> Even on Linux.
>>>>> Problem: linked sections will not be updated if the original section is changed.
>>>>> The button [Synchronise Labels] do nothing other than Tools… → Update → Links (or Tools… → Update → Update All).
>>>>> Simply
>>>>> 1. create a new text document
>>>>> 2. insert a section with content
>>>>> 3. insert a section as link to the first section
>>>>> 4. change the content of the first section
>>>>> 5. Tools… → Update → Links
>>>>> or Tools… → Update → Update All
>>>>> => Nothing happens. :-(
>>>>> Regards, Mathias
>>>>> Am 10.10.2017 um 11:10 schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
>>>>>> Thanks for the report.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have reproduced the problem in my Windows 8.1 debug environment, based on trunk but with some 4.1.4 changes added. I need to get some more sleep before serious debug (it is 2:08 a.m. here). Could someone check whether it happens in the unmodified trunk? That would narrow it down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/10/2017 12:49 AM, FR web forum wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello dev,
>>>>>>> FYI a french user reports this on MacBook Pro SSD OS X 10.12.6 Sierra
>>>>>>> Run File - New - Business Cards
>>>>>>> Choose how your business cards will look
>>>>>>> Click on New document
>>>>>>> Modifiy the first label
>>>>>>> When you click on the Synchronize Labels button, the current label is not copied to all others.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rollback to 4.1.3: works as expected.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Keep calm and don't over-react Was: Re: 4.1.4 show stopper!

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Reply to all, not only Jim:



Wow, I just had a day off and now my inbox is exploding.

Honestly, was it necessary to act within a few hours? Wouldn't it be
better to wait more time?

There is no BZ issue, no blocker request, just mails. The builds aren't
yet public, no communication was gone to the world until now. So, I
don't see a reason to hurry up here.

Really, please let us follow our own processes. Otherwise we cannot be
sure not to forget something.

Marcus



Am 10.10.2017 um 17:59 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

>
>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Mathias Röllig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Raphael!
>>
>> Am 10.10.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Raphael Bircher:
>>> I understand this, I have just an idea. We keep the 4.1.4 as is and
>>> release a patch for the bug. Then we make just new community builds
>>> with > the patch. Like this we avoid to make a 4.1.5 and we stick
>>> within the ASF policy.
>>
>> A patch for *all* platforms must also be tested in all ways. So I think, this way isn't an easy and good way.
>> Simply let 4.1.4 as is but don't let it (official) free.
>> Create a 4.1.5-RC1 (or maybe 4.1.4-RC5 if possible) with this patch, and if no further errors announce 4.1.5.
>>
>
> IMO, this does seem like the most prudent way. Yes, it increases *our*
> workload, but it also is the most transparent and prudent for our end-users
> and any ISVs. For better or worse, ASF source code tags are immutable
> since they are the things that "define" a release.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

1234