[PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
48 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Jim Jagielski

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>
>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>
>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>> naming/graphics:
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>
>>
>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>> filenames for the installation files.
>
> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>

Wow. I had no idea that existed :)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Matthias Seidel
Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>
>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>
>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>> filenames for the installation files.
>> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
>> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>>
> Wow. I had no idea that existed :)
I stumbled upon the beta graphics by accident.

We even have a "Dev" target... ;-)

>
>



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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Jim Jagielski
OK, so where do we specify that? Assuming:

    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n>

Like this?

    build openofficebeta --all -P<m> -- -P<n>

Or this?

    build --all openofficebeta -P<m> -- -P<n>

Or here?

    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n> openofficebeta

None seem to work :(

=============
Building module solenv
=============

Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv

dmake:  Error: -- Don't know how to make `openofficebeta'


> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>>
>>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>>
>>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
>>> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>>>
>> Wow. I had no idea that existed :)
>
> I stumbled upon the beta graphics by accident.
>
> We even have a "Dev" target... ;-)
>
>>
>>
>
>


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Matthias Seidel
I use "--with-packager-list=" in configure and define a pack list
according to:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/pack.lst

Don't know if there is a better way...

Maybe you can see more in:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk

Regards, Matthias


Am 02.12.2017 um 15:33 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

> OK, so where do we specify that? Assuming:
>
>     build --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>
> Like this?
>
>     build openofficebeta --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>
> Or this?
>
>     build --all openofficebeta -P<m> -- -P<n>
>
> Or here?
>
>     build --all -P<m> -- -P<n> openofficebeta
>
> None seem to work :(
>
> =============
> Building module solenv
> =============
>
> Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv
>
> dmake:  Error: -- Don't know how to make `openofficebeta'
>
>
>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>>>
>>>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
>>>> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>>>>
>>> Wow. I had no idea that existed :)
>> I stumbled upon the beta graphics by accident.
>>
>> We even have a "Dev" target... ;-)
>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Jim Jagielski
Thx... Look like packager-list is the easiest way.

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I use "--with-packager-list=" in configure and define a pack list
> according to:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/pack.lst
>
> Don't know if there is a better way...
>
> Maybe you can see more in:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk
>
> Regards, Matthias
>
>
> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:33 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> OK, so where do we specify that? Assuming:
>>
>>    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>
>> Like this?
>>
>>    build openofficebeta --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>
>> Or this?
>>
>>    build --all openofficebeta -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>
>> Or here?
>>
>>    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n> openofficebeta
>>
>> None seem to work :(
>>
>> =============
>> Building module solenv
>> =============
>>
>> Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv
>>
>> dmake:  Error: -- Don't know how to make `openofficebeta'
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>>>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>>>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>>> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
>>>>> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>>>>>
>>>> Wow. I had no idea that existed :)
>>> I stumbled upon the beta graphics by accident.
>>>
>>> We even have a "Dev" target... ;-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Matthias Seidel
Am 02.12.2017 um 15:56 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Thx... Look like packager-list is the easiest way.

This is my list (only Windows):
https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/aoo-build-pack-beta.lst

>
>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I use "--with-packager-list=" in configure and define a pack list
>> according to:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/pack.lst
>>
>> Don't know if there is a better way...
>>
>> Maybe you can see more in:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk
>>
>> Regards, Matthias
>>
>>
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:33 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> OK, so where do we specify that? Assuming:
>>>
>>>    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>>
>>> Like this?
>>>
>>>    build openofficebeta --all -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>>
>>> Or this?
>>>
>>>    build --all openofficebeta -P<m> -- -P<n>
>>>
>>> Or here?
>>>
>>>    build --all -P<m> -- -P<n> openofficebeta
>>>
>>> None seem to work :(
>>>
>>> =============
>>> Building module solenv
>>> =============
>>>
>>> Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv
>>>
>>> dmake:  Error: -- Don't know how to make `openofficebeta'
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>>>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>>>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>>>>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>>>>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>>>> That is all handled by building for target "openofficebeta"
>>>>>> (sdkoobeta/ooobetalanguagepack).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Wow. I had no idea that existed :)
>>>> I stumbled upon the beta graphics by accident.
>>>>
>>>> We even have a "Dev" target... ;-)
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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]
>


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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Marcus (OOo)

On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:

Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate naming/graphics:
https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png

oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different filenames for the installation files.


Here are the results on macOS:



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Andrea Pescetti-2
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
On 01/12/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is fantastic!
> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...

Someone here is forgetting that the biggest chunk of work for 4.2.0 is
with localization. We need to fix the code -> Pootle -> code process and
this won't be trivial at all since we have scarce documentation, little
knowledge and a half-broken situation in Pootle when the last import was
done at some unspecified time. It is not impossible of course, but it
does need some serious work.

So you can provide all the builds you wish, but I would expect that most
of them display localization issues and a localization cycle in 40+
languages usually takes a couple months (once we have fixed the process).

I'm absolutely in favor of a public beta, well publicized and clearly
marked as beta (with its own splash screen etc). This is not the point.
Point is, if you want something out in 2017 then English+kid languages
will be enough, and please call it Alpha or Beta-1 or something that
makes it clear that there will have to be another Beta in a few months
with working localized versions.

Regards,
   Andrea.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Andrea Pescetti-2
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created:
>      https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5
> Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up. I can RM if that's OK
> with everyone.

Fine with me, let's keep unchanged everything that worked well for
4.1.4! Note: this includes the fact that Matthias (if available) should
produce the Windows builds, since we've discovered with 4.1.4 that build
issues are arcane to find at times, and we know that Matthias' Windows
builds worked well for 4.1.4.

Regards,
   Andrea.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Don Lewis-2
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher
On  1 Dec, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce
> 4.2.0-B1.

I think we are still a ways from being ready for a Beta release.  For
instance, we need to do another sweep of the bundled software to see
what needs to be updated.  For instance, I recently saw a new CVE for
curl.  Unfortunately my time is pretty limited for the next month. There
are some other code quality issues that I've stumbled across that I want
to address.

In the meantime, I have no objection to better publicising our dev
builds for the brave to try out and find the problems.


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Am 02.12.2017 um 23:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>> naming/graphics:
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>
>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>> filenames for the installation files.
>>
>
> Here are the results on macOS:

that looks great. On the start center it's a bit different. "beta"
should be aligned with the productname/version like for the splash screen.

Marcus


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Matthias Seidel
Am 03.12.2017 um 10:14 schrieb Marcus:

> Am 02.12.2017 um 23:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png
>>>>
>>>
>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>
>>
>> Here are the results on macOS:
>
> that looks great. On the start center it's a bit different. "beta"
> should be aligned with the productname/version like for the splash screen.
These are the original graphics from 2014...

Technically seen there is no way to put the "beta" behind the product name:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/default_images/framework/res/beta/backing.png

But I am working on that for a while and I would like to propose a
"redesign" of the Start Center:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127158#c15

Of course this would include a nicer version for beta builds.

Regards, Matthias

>
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by Marcus (OOo)
I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC for
for Release Candidate plus a number. So the first version would be 4.2.0RC1

If this does not break something of course.

All the best
Peter

On 03.12.2017 10:14, Marcus wrote:

> Am 02.12.2017 um 23:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png 
>>>>
>>>
>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>
>>
>> Here are the results on macOS:
>
> that looks great. On the start center it's a bit different. "beta"
> should be aligned with the productname/version like for the splash
> screen.
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
On 12/1/2017 4:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created:
>
>     https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5 <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5>
>
> Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up. I can RM if that's OK
> with everyone.
I have added the Release Notes page from the template at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5+Release+Notes.
I believe that you are the best person for RM for this.

Regards
Keith

>
>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/1/2017 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution
>>> to some 4.1.4 regressions.
>>>
>>> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the
>>> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is
>>> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain
>>> the relationship.
>>>
>>> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>>>> fantastic!
>>>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>>>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>>>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>>>>
>>>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello
>>>>>
>>>>> I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Mechtilde
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds
>>>>>> available
>>>>>> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
>>>>>> <http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/>) for some langs
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>>>>>>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but
>>>>>>>> not having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the
>>>>>>>> team think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that
>>>>>>>> this would be an advantage for the project and might serve to
>>>>>>>> bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test
>>>>>>> phase for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising
>>>>>>> areas on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of
>>>>>>> 4.2.0 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality
>>>>>>> towards the final release build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I
>>>>>>> would like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our
>>>>>>> users. Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody
>>>>>>> wants to handle.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Mechtilde Stehmann
>>>>> ## Apache OpenOffice.org
>>>>> ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
>>>>> ## Debian Developer
>>>>> ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
>>>>> ## PGP encryption welcome
>>>>> ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>> +1 to this. We need to get out the corrections for the 4.1.4 regressions
>> soon as possible.
>
>


signature.asc (537 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
Am 03.12.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC for
> for Release Candidate plus a number. So the first version would be 4.2.0RC1
>
> If this does not break something of course.

I think this wouldn't be suitable. As soon as we have the last RC which
get approved, it is automatically the final release build. But a RC in
names and graphics is not what we want.

And doing a new build without the RC stuff cannot be done as it is not
what we had voted for.

The max we could do is to use RC in the filenames. Then we need maybe
just a rename and we have the final build. In the worst case it's just a
new upload with the same binary files but then with correct filenames.

Marcus



> On 03.12.2017 10:14, Marcus wrote:
>> Am 02.12.2017 um 23:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't
>>>>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)
>>>>> Apart from that: +1 for a public beta.
>>>>> But we should build "real" beta builds, with the appropriate
>>>>> naming/graphics:
>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Beta/About%20OpenOffice%20Beta%204.2.0.png 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> oh yes, good hint. IMHO the splash screen and start center graphic
>>>> should show clearly that this is a beta release. Plus different
>>>> filenames for the installation files.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Here are the results on macOS:
>>
>> that looks great. On the start center it's a bit different. "beta"
>> should be aligned with the productname/version like for the splash
>> screen.
>>
>> Marcus

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Patricia Shanahan
On 12/3/2017 6:50 AM, Marcus wrote:

> Am 03.12.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC
>> for for Release Candidate plus a number. So the first version would be
>> 4.2.0RC1
>>
>> If this does not break something of course.
>
> I think this wouldn't be suitable. As soon as we have the last RC which
> get approved, it is automatically the final release build. But a RC in
> names and graphics is not what we want.
>
> And doing a new build without the RC stuff cannot be done as it is not
> what we had voted for.
>
> The max we could do is to use RC in the filenames. Then we need maybe
> just a rename and we have the final build. In the worst case it's just a
> new upload with the same binary files but then with correct filenames.
>
> Marcus

I am opposed even to changing file names. Anything we do between the
final testing and uploading to SourceForge is a risk of something going
wrong with the process at a point where it can affect millions.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Jim Jagielski

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Patricia Shanahan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 12/3/2017 6:50 AM, Marcus wrote:
>> Am 03.12.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC for for Release Candidate plus a number. So the first version would be 4.2.0RC1
>>>
>>> If this does not break something of course.
>> I think this wouldn't be suitable. As soon as we have the last RC which get approved, it is automatically the final release build. But a RC in names and graphics is not what we want.
>> And doing a new build without the RC stuff cannot be done as it is not what we had voted for.
>> The max we could do is to use RC in the filenames. Then we need maybe just a rename and we have the final build. In the worst case it's just a new upload with the same binary files but then with correct filenames.
>> Marcus
>
> I am opposed even to changing file names. Anything we do between the final testing and uploading to SourceForge is a risk of something going wrong with the process at a point where it can affect millions.
>

FWIW, I agree. This part of the process works well enough, I think,
and any "improvements" are likely not worth the risks.


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Jim Jagielski
Am 01.12.2017 um 22:51 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created:
>
>      https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5 <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5>
>
> Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up.

thanks for this. In the meantime I've also done some changes.

> I can RM if that's OK with everyone.

Yes, please. :-)

Marcus



>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/1/2017 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution
>>> to some 4.1.4 regressions.
>>>
>>> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the
>>> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is
>>> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain
>>> the relationship.
>>>
>>> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>>>> fantastic!
>>>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>>>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>>>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>>>>
>>>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello
>>>>>
>>>>> I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Mechtilde
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds
>>>>>> available
>>>>>> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
>>>>>> <http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/>) for some langs
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>>>>>>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but
>>>>>>>> not having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the
>>>>>>>> team think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that
>>>>>>>> this would be an advantage for the project and might serve to
>>>>>>>> bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test
>>>>>>> phase for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising
>>>>>>> areas on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of
>>>>>>> 4.2.0 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality
>>>>>>> towards the final release build.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I
>>>>>>> would like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our
>>>>>>> users. Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody
>>>>>>> wants to handle.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Mechtilde Stehmann
>>>>> ## Apache OpenOffice.org
>>>>> ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
>>>>> ## Debian Developer
>>>>> ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
>>>>> ## PGP encryption welcome
>>>>> ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>> +1 to this. We need to get out the corrections for the 4.1.4 regressions
>> soon as possible.


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Matthias Seidel
In reply to this post by Andrea Pescetti-2
Am 03.12.2017 um 01:09 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created:
     https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5
Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up. I can RM if that's OK
with everyone.

Fine with me, let's keep unchanged everything that worked well for 4.1.4! Note: this includes the fact that Matthias (if available) should produce the Windows builds, since we've discovered with 4.1.4 that build issues are arcane to find at times, and we know that Matthias' Windows builds worked well for 4.1.4.

Yes, I am available... ;-)

Regards, Matthias


Regards,
  Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

Kay Schenk-2
In reply to this post by Andrea Pescetti-2

On 12/02/2017 04:03 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 01/12/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>> fantastic!
>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>
> Someone here is forgetting that the biggest chunk of work for 4.2.0 is
> with localization. We need to fix the code -> Pootle -> code process and
> this won't be trivial at all since we have scarce documentation, little
> knowledge and a half-broken situation in Pootle when the last import was
> done at some unspecified time. It is not impossible of course, but it
> does need some serious work.

+1...this is a BIGGIE for 4.2.0 in my mind.

>
> So you can provide all the builds you wish, but I would expect that most
> of them display localization issues and a localization cycle in 40+
> languages usually takes a couple months (once we have fixed the process).
>
> I'm absolutely in favor of a public beta, well publicized and clearly
> marked as beta (with its own splash screen etc). This is not the point.
> Point is, if you want something out in 2017 then English+kid languages
> will be enough, and please call it Alpha or Beta-1 or something that
> makes it clear that there will have to be another Beta in a few months
> with working localized versions.
>
> Regards,
>    Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

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

"Don't you know that it's worth
  every treasure on earth
  To be young at heart."
               -- song, "Young at Heart"

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

123