Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=Sf3ZOpk+xJPQmCgunzAJpxp6WPyZ0z8MdXLCsJZWj2pBxRYMd626gV37uaXo0K4DVLeufp4bSoOonI6mQcTSlneICTdqOm5jhxI8Rct/tTwgFRZOUXHZaLMTeCVl9/UTrxKHj3x0xmu0Ron/9O0921SOTgg5lEbUJ/UFmnE/FZE=;
References: <4F001CA0.6020000@mechtilde.de>
  <CAHZP38AjOUMLTJSjNLwoG5PVTvdVaDCqjR0_VObSAuH6meJ0NQ@mail.gmail.com>
  <4F01DC3E.1070304@mechtilde.de>
  <7F5B658E-F91C-46D2-BDE4-C1C72CA0EFC3@comcast.net>
  <4F04A76C.90300@oracle.com>
  <D532F585-D05A-4F79-B96C-9CCFFA44F178@comcast.net>
 <1325707774.2331.45.camel@sybil-gnome>
Message-ID: <1325708155.16260.YahooMailNeo@web160902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 12:15:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <1325707774.2331.45.camel@sybil-gnome>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Some friendly advice is to be careful how you "promote"=0Athat buildbot lin=
k.=A0 The ASF has very strict rules regarding=0Athe promotion of releases v=
ersus build artifacts- which=0Aare only supposed to be exposed to fellow de=
velopers: see=0A=0Ahttp://www.apache.org/dev/release#what=0A=0A=0AHTH=0A=0A=
=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A> From: drew <drew@baseanswers.com>=0A=
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org=0A> Cc: =0A> Sent: Wednesday, January 4,=
 2012 3:09 PM=0A> Subject: Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed=0A> =0A> On We=
d, 2012-01-04 at 11:47 -0800, Dave Fisher wrote:=0A>>  On Jan 4, 2012, at 1=
1:24 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:=0A>> =0A>>  > On 1/2/2012 8:47 AM, Dave Fisher =
wrote:=0A>>  >> Hi Mechtilde,=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> There are developer snapsh=
ots available - if you follow the ML =0A> closely they are discussed.=0A>> =
 >> =0A>>  >> Have a look at this: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/devsnap.php=
=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> Raphael has been making significant contributions to AO=
O since day =0A> one.=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> Andrew RIst and others have been w=
orking with Gavin from Apache =0A> Infra on buildbots for several platforms=
.=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> Please see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA=
-4197=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> I agree that this information is hard to find. Som=
eone should blog =0A> about it and let people know...=0A>>  > This is indee=
d an on going project.=A0 I am trying to work with =0A> infrastructure to g=
et this up and running.=A0 As such, the infrastructure team is =0A> a limit=
ed resource, and basically, we are waiting for our turn.=A0 (right now they=
 =0A> are dealing with other fires, like someone who uploaded a 9GB website=
 and pushed =0A> CMS right to the edge...=A0 DAVE=A0 ;-)=0A>> =0A>>  The on=
ly sledgehammer build coming will be when we pull the trigger on the =0A> l=
ogo change. Otherwise everything is a vertical.=0A>> =0A>>  > This is movin=
g forward, a little patience is in order.=0A>> =0A>>  I'm sure that stable =
templates and extensions is taking some of =0A> Gavin's attention away from=
 the buildbot. What's our priority?=0A> =0A> My thoughts on this - the appl=
ication, the physical distribution files,=0A> should take precedence for br=
anding purpose.=0A> =0A> In other words, I would advocate leaving the brand=
ing on the=0A> OpenOffice.org website basically unchanged from as it is tod=
ay and work=0A> smartly towards the change to what displays on the users sc=
reens when=0A> they download and install a binary retrieved from the site.=
=0A> =0A> I'm not saying to delay the web site branding change until a full=
 3.4=0A> release, but rather only until a link to an ASP buildbot download =
URl is=0A> ready for publishing. My working assumption on time for that, if=
 I'm=0A> understanding correctly what I'm reading in the mailing list, is t=
hat=0A> this is really not that far off down the road - a week, a few weeks=
 most=0A> it sounds like.=0A> =0A> I think it makes sense branding wise to =
manifest intentions in little=0A> details such as this, right now (last few=
 days) with the few thousand=0A> signups on the announce list and some othe=
r social net activity it seems=0A> as if the next ring outwards of OO.o int=
erested individuals are waking=0A> up to what is happening here - so maybe =
for this next week we don't=0A> break the visual links to the legacy OO.o s=
ite, not until we have that=0A> concrete link to what is actually of intere=
st to them, the application.=0A> Let the early bird versions of the applica=
tion break the ice with the=0A> full blown new name and branding, not the w=
ebsite.=0A> =0A> just my .02=0A> =0A> //drew=0A> =0A>> =0A>>  Regards,=0A>>=
  Dave=0A>> =0A>>  > =0A>>  > A.=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> Regards,=0A>>  >> Dave=
=0A>>  >> =0A>>  >> On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Mechtilde wrote:=0A>>  >> =
=0A>>  >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----=0A>>  >>> Hash: SHA1=0A>>  >>=
> =0A>>  >>> Hello J=FCrgen,=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> Am 02.01.2012 =
10:32, schrieb J=FCrgen Schmidt:=0A>>  >>>> Hi Mechtilde,=0A>>  >>>> =0A>> =
 >>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, =0A> Mechtilde<ooo@mechtilde.de>=A0 w=
rote:=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> Hey,=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> you discuss about =
Release Plan and who are allowed to =0A> distribute=0A>>  >>>> binaries wit=
h the name Apache OpenOffice.=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> But:=0A>>  >>>> =0A>> =
 >>>> What should a user do?=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> There is no "official" =
binary available which =0A> anyone can install for=0A>>  >>>> testing.=0A>>=
  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> The DEB binary from=A0 =0A> http://ci.apache.org/project=
s/openoffice/install/=0A>>  >>>> can't be installed on a Debian 64 bit syst=
em.=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> I already described this problem at 17.12.2011 b=
ut nothing =0A> happened. As=0A>>  >>>> Ariel described there must be an up=
date of one programm on =0A> the buildbot.=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> Does Apac=
he also want to release more than one plattform?=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> So =
we also need test binaries for these plattforms.=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> In =
my opinion this is an *absolute release stopper* not to =0A> have binaries=
=0A>>  >>>> to test from "official" build maschines.=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>>=
 =0A>>  >>>>> it's of course a serious problem where we have to =0A> find a=
 solution. We don't=0A>>  >>>>> have the same infra structure as before and=
 the =0A> release engineers did a lot=0A>>  >>>>> to ensure a common base l=
ine to support as many Linux =0A> versions as possible.=0A>>  >>> At this t=
ime there is NO other version for any plattform on=0A>>  >>> http://ci.apac=
he.org/projects/openoffice/install/ available=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >=
>> =0A>>  >>>>> Normally the office would come via the distro and =0A> woul=
d have been build for=0A>>  >>>>> the distro and the specific versions of t=
he system =0A> libraries. This is much=0A>>  >>>>> easier and i hope we can=
 achieve this state in the =0A> future...=0A>>  >>> There is NO version of =
Apache OpenOffice and there is NO =0A> version to test=0A>>  >>> it before =
a release.=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>>>> For now we have to find another solution.=
 We should =0A> update the build bot=0A>>  >>>>> machine if possible. You h=
ave already mentioned the =0A> note from Ariel. And it=0A>>  >>>>> would be=
 probably good to have a 32 bit build bot =0A> machine as well.=A0 That=0A>=
>  >>>>> would help a lot and would probably=A0 address most the =0A> syste=
ms (an update=0A>>  >>>>> on=A0 Linux system is done quite often, isn't it)=
=0A>>  >>> It depends on the based distribution.=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> Debia=
n oldstable ( ca. 3 years old IMO) contains e very newer =0A> version of=0A=
>>  >>> the epm programm than the one Ariel talked from.=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >=
>>>> We should define the exact switches that we use for =0A> our binary re=
leases and=0A>>  >>>>> hopefully we can provide a set of builds on various =
=0A> systems for testing=0A>>  >>>>> purposes.=0A>>  >>> That's what I ask =
for.=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>>>> There is definitely a lot of room for improveme=
nts, so =0A> let us start to=0A>>  >>>>> figure our out what works best and=
 let us improve our =0A> build/release process=0A>>  >>>>> over time.=0A>> =
 >>> So when can we start to test the first binary coming from =0A> Apache?=
=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> Thats my question=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> Kind Regards=
=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> Mechtilde=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>>>> Juergen=
=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> Kind Regards=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>>> Mec=
htilde=0A>>  >>>> =0A>>  >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----=0A>>  >>> Versio=
n: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)=0A>>  >>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - =
=0A> http://enigmail.mozdev.org/=0A>>  >>> =0A>>  >>> =0A> iEYEARECAAYFAk8B=
3D0ACgkQucZfh1OziSsnIQCgng7nknPbh6l9CDepzoTrw9AG=0A>>  >>> K2YAn39Ck/9nbWa7=
CgWoD8EXJZuB0wZe=0A>>  >>> =3DulAm=0A>>  >>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----=0A=
>>  > =0A>> =0A>> =0A>