incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] milestone build (Was: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...)
Date Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:05:21 GMT
On 10/11/12 4:59 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
> 2012/10/10 Marcus (OOo) <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
> 
>> Am 10/09/2012 03:58 AM, schrieb Shenfeng Liu:
>>
>>  2012/10/9 Ariel Constenla-Haile<arielch@**apache.org <arielch@apache.org>
>>>>
>>>
>>>  Hi Jürgen, *
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:58:03PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The build bots are still not build the same as we do for the binary
>>>>> releases (please correct me if I am wrong). Means as long as we don't
>>>>> have build bots which are building with the same configuration we should
>>>>> provide the builds manually in the same way we did it for the release.
>>>>>
>>>>> @Ariel, would that be ok for you fro now until we have a better
>>>>> solution?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I will apply the set up described in
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119385<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385>,
that is,
>>>> decreasing Linux system requirements to glibc 2.5
>>>>
>>>> Any one is welcome to take any of the two architectures (building on
>>>> Linux is multiplied by 4: rpm/deb, 32 and 64 bits; this counts on
>>>> building time and uploading the packages); if not, I will take care of
>>>> both.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I will take care of Windows and MacOS.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    (2) How many language support can we get for this milestone build?
>>>>>> Not
>>>>>> necessary to be 100% translated, but can be a base for volunteers
to
>>>>>>
>>>>> verify
>>>>
>>>>> the translation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We should include the languages that we have released and add all
>>>>> languages where we notice active volunteers who help us to support these
>>>>> further languages (eg. Polish, Danish, Scots Gaelic, ...)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    (3) The current development snapshot naming [a] is a little confusing
>>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>> me. I wonder if we can change the naming to reflect the date of the
>>>>>>
>>>>> build?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure if understand you correct. The revision is a unique
>>>>> identifier and makes it clear what went in the snapshot. We probably
>>>>> upload the builds not all on the same day. Means I am not sure how a
>>>>> date can help here.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess that besides the revision, milestone builds can be identified by
>>>> their milestone number, which should be increased in every milestone
>>>> build: AOO350m1 AOO350m2 etc
>>>>
>>>> just like in OOo times there was DEV300m105 DEV300m106 etc
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**development/releases/**
>>>> DEV300m106_snapshot.html<http://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/DEV300m106_snapshot.html>
>>>> it could start now from DEV350m1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  OK, I understand the revision now, and let's forget the "date".
>>> And I agree with Ariel that a milestone number like AOO350m1 will be
>>> better
>>> when we promote it.
>>> I personally do not think we need to use mirror. But a download page that
>>> Marcus suggested will be good.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, the download page can point to the builds on the mirror system or
>> the ASF people's directories (when the paths are unified then automatism is
>> much easier).
>>
>> But when using the mirrors we could:
>> - stear the timeframe how long a milestone should be online,
>> - when to release the next dev build,
>> - a simple point of downloadable dev builds,
>> - and of course we can see how often which file was downloaded. To see if
>> it's worth the efforts at all.
>>
>> So, I think we should try to distribute the dev builds via the mirror
>> system. If we laster think that it doesn't make sense anymore then we can
>> stop it.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
> 
> You persuaded me, Marcus. :) I agree mirrors will be good for the milestone
> build. As far as we can contain the effort.
> 
> I went through all the implemented features and enhancements for 3.5.0,
> added/removed the Target Milestone value to some of the records.
> And I created a query *TargetTo350FEATURE_Fixed* that can be easier for us
> to write release notes:
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&remaction=run&namedcmd=TargetTo350FEATURE_Fixed&sharer_id=249089
> I hope people can check the query and confirm the features/enhancements. As
> Arial pointed out in another mail, my reading from the issue history may
> not be consistent with the code.
> 
> I will continue to check the defects, which may take more time... Currently
> there are 175 per TargetTo350AllFixed .
> 
> Juergen & Arial, can I know where we are with the builds?

we don't have started yet because we haven't finally agreed on a
version. I will check the build bots tomorrow morning and will propose a
revision for the next dev snapshot. We can build and upload them over
the weekend and should have them on Monday ready.

Juergen


> 
> Thanks very much for you all's support!
> 
> - Simon
> 


Mime
View raw message