incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Raphael Bircher <r.birc...@gmx.ch>
Subject Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
Date Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:41:35 GMT
Hi Dave

Just to clarify. Mechtilde is a contributor since day 0 - 7 years. She 
is one of the moast experienced QA here, and a verry skilled manual 
tester. So she is not a newbe at all.

I build only for mac, for linux i point to the Buildbot too. If this 
builds don't work for a Linux distribution it is a serios problem, so 
it's right to bring it on the list.

What Mechtilde miss, are de frequently snapshots from the project it 
self, not from same contributors. The test build should be from the same 
mashine as the final release. You can build AOO on two computers with 
Linux, you will have two different builds even you use the same revision.

For this reason, test builds has to come from the same mashin as the 
release. For my point of view it's not a good idea to use a contributors 
computer for it. So the main plattform Wendows, Linux, Mac realy need a 
Buildbot, and this is not a "nice to have" it's a *realy urgent task*

And if one of this Buildbot produce unusable builds, then we have a 
serios problem.

Greetings Raphael
Am 02.01.12 17:47, schrieb Dave Fisher:
> 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...
>
> 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-----
>


-- 
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/

Mime
View raw message