Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 274DED8F3 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 93745 invoked by uid 500); 14 Aug 2012 20:41:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 93679 invoked by uid 500); 14 Aug 2012 20:41:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 93671 invoked by uid 99); 14 Aug 2012 20:41:19 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:41:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of marcus.mail@wtnet.de designates 213.209.103.3 as permitted sender) Received: from [213.209.103.3] (HELO smtp1.wtnet.de) (213.209.103.3) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:41:10 +0000 X-WT-Originating-IP: 84.46.110.107 Received: from f9.linux (pop8-1636.catv.wtnet.de [84.46.110.107]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.wtnet.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7EKjN9a001393 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:45:28 +0200 Message-ID: <502AB7CC.8060507@wtnet.de> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:40:44 +0200 From: "Marcus (OOo)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 Thunderbird/3.1.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: 3.4.1_release_blocker? [Bug 120481] Please have a look References: <819235281.114659382.1344933341295.JavaMail.root@zimbra60-e10.priv.proxad.net> <302420466.114676231.1344933761876.JavaMail.root@zimbra60-e10.priv.proxad.net> <502A7413.7010908@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <502A7413.7010908@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Am 08/14/2012 05:51 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: > On 8/14/12 2:51 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:42 AM, FR web forum wrote: >>> Hello list, >>> >>> French user has open this report: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120481 >>> >>> Unable to drag& drop column header from data sources beamer (F4) to Writer document. >>> This happen only with MacOS 10.8 >>> >> >> What I look for in a release blocker at this point: >> >> 1) Is the impact severe, i.e., data loss, blocks use of a major features, etc. >> >> 2) Will it impact many users? >> >> 3) Is there no adequate workaround that we can put in the release notes? >> >> >> Again, there is no risk-free fix. The fact that this bug was >> introduced via an earlier fix proves that. >> >> >> It is safe to assume that with more days of testing we will find more >> bugs. We could probably test for another 6 months and still find new >> bugs. That is the nature of complex software. But the question is >> not whether or not we fix this bug. Of course we will. The question >> is between: >> >> A) Fix this bug later in 3.4.3 or in 3.5 >> >> or >> >> B) Fix this bug in 3.4.1, and delay the delivery of this release, >> which contains many other critical fixes for more severe issues. Also >> introduce further risks for 3.4.1 by changing more code. >> >> IMHO the decision between A and B should be based on impact, severity and risk. >> >> Does anyone have an opinion on the impact and severity? >> > > I think as release manager I should have an opinion ;-) > > Ok to be more serious, we have analyzed the problem. Armin remembered > the issue 117990 that we have integrated early in the 3.4.1 branch and > that solved another serious problem with the clipboard in the calc > application. This fix was tested and verified but as side effect we have > now this new problem. It is definitely a regression to 3.4. > > Andre and I have analyzed the code and we have a potential fix that > solves of course both problems. But we are not 100% sure if this fix is > good enough or if it introduce new problems. As Rob mentioned every fix > contains a risk to break something else. > > At the moment I am unsure but I tend to leave it out of 3.4.1. > > The question is how many users are affected by this problem or if the > workaround via Insert -> Fields -> ... is ok for now. Reverting the fix > for 117990 is no option because it is serious as well and probably more > users are affected by this issue as by the new problem. > > For now I would propose that we continue to analyze the fix a little bit > more and try to understand the code better. And when we have to rebuild > for another critical show stopper, we will potentially integrate the fix > for this problem as well if we feel more comfortable with the fix. I second this. Lets now concentrate on really critical issues. Marcus