incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From drew <d...@baseanswers.com>
Subject Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:33:20 GMT
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 12:15 -0800, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Some friendly advice is to be careful how you "promote"
> that buildbot link.  The ASF has very strict rules regarding
> the promotion of releases versus build artifacts- which
> are only supposed to be exposed to fellow developers: see
> 
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release#what
> 
> 
> HTH

Thanks - ok, read that.

For a concrete example the OO.o project has historically had a link from
the download page to Developer Snapshots:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/next/index.html

I've noted a number of the developers on the mailing list here bring up
the idea of the weekly build - and that is where my thinking was, so
where I used buildBot, I'd substitute, this Developer Snapshot which I'd
presume will end up coming from the buildBot..

//drew

> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: drew <drew@baseanswers.com>
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: 
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 3:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
> > 
> > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 11:47 -0800, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>  On Jan 4, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
> >> 
> >>  > On 1/2/2012 8:47 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>  >> Hi Mechtilde,
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> There are developer snapshots available - if you follow the ML 
> > closely they are discussed.
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> Have a look at this: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/devsnap.php
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> Raphael has been making significant contributions to AOO since day

> > one.
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> Andrew RIst and others have been working with Gavin from Apache 
> > Infra on buildbots for several platforms.
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> Please see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4197
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> I agree that this information is hard to find. Someone should blog

> > about it and let people know...
> >>  > This is indeed an on going project.  I am trying to work with 
> > infrastructure to get this up and running.  As such, the infrastructure team is

> > a limited resource, and basically, we are waiting for our turn.  (right now they

> > are dealing with other fires, like someone who uploaded a 9GB website and pushed

> > CMS right to the edge...  DAVE  ;-)
> >> 
> >>  The only sledgehammer build coming will be when we pull the trigger on the

> > logo change. Otherwise everything is a vertical.
> >> 
> >>  > This is moving forward, a little patience is in order.
> >> 
> >>  I'm sure that stable templates and extensions is taking some of 
> > Gavin's attention away from the buildbot. What's our priority?
> > 
> > My thoughts on this - the application, the physical distribution files,
> > should take precedence for branding purpose.
> > 
> > In other words, I would advocate leaving the branding on the
> > OpenOffice.org website basically unchanged from as it is today and work
> > smartly towards the change to what displays on the users screens when
> > they download and install a binary retrieved from the site.
> > 
> > I'm not saying to delay the web site branding change until a full 3.4
> > release, but rather only until a link to an ASP buildbot download URl is
> > ready for publishing. My working assumption on time for that, if I'm
> > understanding correctly what I'm reading in the mailing list, is that
> > this is really not that far off down the road - a week, a few weeks most
> > it sounds like.
> > 
> > I think it makes sense branding wise to manifest intentions in little
> > details such as this, right now (last few days) with the few thousand
> > signups on the announce list and some other social net activity it seems
> > as if the next ring outwards of OO.o interested individuals are waking
> > up to what is happening here - so maybe for this next week we don't
> > break the visual links to the legacy OO.o site, not until we have that
> > concrete link to what is actually of interest to them, the application.
> > Let the early bird versions of the application break the ice with the
> > full blown new name and branding, not the website.
> > 
> > just my .02
> > 
> > //drew
> > 
> >> 
> >>  Regards,
> >>  Dave
> >> 
> >>  > 
> >>  > A.
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> Regards,
> >>  >> Dave
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Mechtilde wrote:
> >>  >> 
> >>  >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>  >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Hello Jürgen,
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Am 02.01.2012 10:32, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> >>  >>>> Hi Mechtilde,
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, 
> > Mechtilde<ooo@mechtilde.de>  wrote:
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> Hey,
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> you discuss about Release Plan and who are allowed to 
> > distribute
> >>  >>>> binaries with the name Apache OpenOffice.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> But:
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> What should a user do?
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> There is no "official" binary available which 
> > anyone can install for
> >>  >>>> testing.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> The DEB binary from  
> > http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/
> >>  >>>> can't be installed on a Debian 64 bit system.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> I already described this problem at 17.12.2011 but nothing

> > happened. As
> >>  >>>> Ariel described there must be an update of one programm on

> > the buildbot.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> Does Apache also want to release more than one plattform?
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> So we also need test binaries for these plattforms.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> In my opinion this is an *absolute release stopper* not to

> > have binaries
> >>  >>>> to test from "official" build maschines.
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>>> it's of course a serious problem where we have to 
> > find a solution. We don't
> >>  >>>>> have the same infra structure as before and the 
> > release engineers did a lot
> >>  >>>>> to ensure a common base line to support as many Linux

> > versions as possible.
> >>  >>> At this time there is NO other version for any plattform on
> >>  >>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/ available
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>>>> Normally the office would come via the distro and 
> > would have been build for
> >>  >>>>> the distro and the specific versions of the system 
> > libraries. This is much
> >>  >>>>> easier and i hope we can achieve this state in the 
> > future...
> >>  >>> There is NO version of Apache OpenOffice and there is NO 
> > version to test
> >>  >>> it before a release.
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>>>> For now we have to find another solution. We should 
> > update the build bot
> >>  >>>>> machine if possible. You have already mentioned the 
> > note from Ariel. And it
> >>  >>>>> would be probably good to have a 32 bit build bot 
> > machine as well.  That
> >>  >>>>> would help a lot and would probably  address most the

> > systems (an update
> >>  >>>>> on  Linux system is done quite often, isn't it)
> >>  >>> It depends on the based distribution.
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Debian oldstable ( ca. 3 years old IMO) contains e very newer

> > version of
> >>  >>> the epm programm than the one Ariel talked from.
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>>>> We should define the exact switches that we use for 
> > our binary releases and
> >>  >>>>> hopefully we can provide a set of builds on various 
> > systems for testing
> >>  >>>>> purposes.
> >>  >>> That's what I ask for.
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>>>> There is definitely a lot of room for improvements, so

> > let us start to
> >>  >>>>> figure our out what works best and let us improve our

> > build/release process
> >>  >>>>> over time.
> >>  >>> So when can we start to test the first binary coming from 
> > Apache?
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Thats my question
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Kind Regards
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> Mechtilde
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>>>> Juergen
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> Kind Regards
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>>> Mechtilde
> >>  >>>> 
> >>  >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>  >>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> >>  >>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - 
> > http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> >>  >>> 
> >>  >>> 
> > iEYEARECAAYFAk8B3D0ACgkQucZfh1OziSsnIQCgng7nknPbh6l9CDepzoTrw9AG
> >>  >>> K2YAn39Ck/9nbWa7CgWoD8EXJZuB0wZe
> >>  >>> =ulAm
> >>  >>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>  > 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> 



Mime
View raw message