incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Non-Apache maintenance release for OOo 3.3?
Date Sat, 26 Nov 2011 16:22:33 GMT

On Nov 25, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Martin Hollmichel wrote:

> Allen,
> 
> in the past the OpenOffice.org release process for micro releases looked like this:
> 
> * propose a tentative release data 3 months behind the release of the minor version
> * propose issues and must haves for the micro release, new features and new strings (which
would cause a new translation cycle) were not allowed
> ** regressions newly introduced with the prior release get high priority for the micorelease
(must haves)
> ** regular defects can be nominated for the micro release by everybody
> * once all nominated and accepted issues got fixed a release candidate was provided and
there was one week given for feedback. In case not all issues got fixed or new regressions
got introduced a new release candidate cycle was done.
> * to ensure that this process comes to an end, there was a release committee with representatives
from all areas (QA, Development, native-lang communities, marketing (PR), Linux distros, user
experience) which decided on the final "go" for the release
> 
> for a 3.3.1 release I wouldn't change that process dramatically, so I have just a small
list of issues and security fixes in mind, plus the changes we agree we have to do for branding.
(I have one more favorite: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=112141 reintroduce
color codes for mime type icons).
> 
> I'm not famliar enough with the ASF release process so I have no final proposal on how
to do this for a 3.3.1 release, but I think we can use the old process as a basis. The new
setup gives the opportunity to do some things better,

An ASF release requires that all the IP is cleared in the packages otherwise it cannot be
an Apache release. There is a public vote process on the dev list that would typically be
a full week. Any PPMC member voting +1 is vouching for the quality, but even more importantly
they are vouching for the IP being clean and all AL compatible. There is usually a source
release and a binary release and these are signed by the "Release Manager". Signatures are
checked. A -1 for any IP or signature problem will abort the process and new packages will
need to be created with a new vote.

All of the steps you discuss above are expected to be openly discussed on the dev list. If
decisions are made between individuals via teleconference or other means then the results
should be reported to the list. Everyone must have the chance to comment on the plan, there
may not be consensus.

Coming in with a minor (micro?) release at this time presents significant issues for the PPMC
(and extra work).

It would help if you were specific with the bug fixes applied by TOOo in the 3.3.1 variation
of the source and would submit these as patches to the project SVN under the AL.

I hope others will respond with further questions and answers. The switchover of www.openoffice.org
to the ASF needs my non-fulltime job focus for the next week, I'm interested in what happens
here, but won't be able to pay close attention.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> hth,
> Martin
> 
> On 11/25/11 5:58 PM, Allen Pulsifer wrote:
>>> Just a quick note that a proposal has been submitted using the form at
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html
>>> to ooo-private...
>> 
>> 
>> Hello Stefan,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I would only be willing to consider your proposal if it addressed in detail
>> each of the questions/issues I raised in this email:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3C0
>> 02a01cca546$1b831150$528933f0$@apache.org%3E
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So I think your request to ooo-private is either premature or incomplete,
>> since none of the questions/issues I raised above have been addressed and
>> accepted.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Allen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message