incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [EXTENSIONS][RELEASE] (was RE: Calling all volunteers: It is time to test)
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2012 01:17:46 GMT
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Larry Gusaas <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2012-03-05 4:38 PM  Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> This has been known for several months and has been part of the 3.4 plan.
>> We discussed it extensively in early December. Certainly if you have new
>> information, new workarounds, new proposals, or even new code, then I'm new
>> we all would love to know about it. But if you are just noticing this for
>> the first time, you might want to check the list archives to catch up on the
>> previous discussion first. Search for "berkeleydb".
>
>
> The problem with the database was known. The fact that you were planning to
> release a version that overwrote OOo and erased the extensions in the user
> profile was not clear until you asked for testing. And now you are
> complaining about us reporting the problems found.
>

Maybe not clear to you, but the information was provided in early
December when the code change was made.  This was not hidden.  The
implications of this were plainly stated, for example on the wiki page
that explained the user-facing ramifications of removing the Berkeley
DB:

"The impact is that extensions installed for older versions of
OpenOffice have to be re-installed."

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/IP_Clearance+Impact


-Rob

Mime
View raw message