Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openoffice.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kay.schenk@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.45 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <-1174665769558747671@unknownmsgid>
References: <51A3790C.4090304@gmail.com>
	<CAP-ksoiFx7+OTUn0uu9vMZq96jO6yD4zo+GwBNbBJ+D3aVZ7+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<2A31F7D9A851456EBF50676679984317@gmail.com>
	<CAP-ksohR+wUheU8=tVOk+ZaFStWUX-BpL4vmGRmRCpf79LuJAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A84E36.4070106@apache.org>
	<-1174665769558747671@unknownmsgid>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:16:47 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAGj3214b=n4JRwV7fv0H7vqK8Zq_KUbZYuYm2SMp5awnW47RLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RELEASE]: proposed further schedule towards AOO 4.0
From: Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com>
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e0c655d737104de094b08

--047d7b2e0c655d737104de094b08
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rob Weir <rabastus@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 31, 2013, at 3:16 AM, "Herbert D=FCrr" <hdu@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > [regarding dropping stlport4]
> >
> > The changes to make the codebase ready for native STL support are done.
> Builds with stlport4 enabled will continue to work as before.
> >
> > I suggest to use the --without-stlport option for all new builds though=
:
> Stlport is a great project, but the versions that OOo depended on had bee=
n
> released more than ten years ago. The library improved greatly since then
> from a feature, performance and standard compliance perspective. And of
> course many many bugs have been fixed [1]. In their stlport5 version they
> continue to improve significantly.
> >
> > Platform STLs have been inspired by stlport, improved greatly too and i=
n
> the C++11 standardization process divergent views have consolidated. We c=
an
> rely on the platform STLs. I agree that the timing of the suggested switc=
h
> is not so good but the switch itself is overdue. A major version change i=
s
> the right time to do this.
> >
> > [1] relevant examples of fixes that got into stlport releases newer tha=
n
> the ones OOo depended on can be seen at e.g.
> http://stlport.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=3Dstlport/stlport;a=
=3Dblob;f=3Detc/ChangeLog;hb=3Drefs/tags/STLport-STLPORT_4_6
> >
> > On 2013/05/28 2:38 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> In theory every fix can cause bugs.  But some fixes are more localized
> >> than others.  Fixes with localized impact are easier to test.
> >> Widespread fixes are harder to test, because more code is potentially
> >> broken.
> >
> > The switch was rendered possible by many little changes over the last
> couple of months which got our code base more in line with C++11
> expectations. Snapshots based on these changes have been and are already
> extensively tested by our great QA community. The switch itself is just
> another step in evolving towards a high quality release.
> >
> > Additionally testing has it much easier to find issues introduced by th=
e
> switch should there be any. E.g. we have many testers and almost a thousa=
nd
> automatic tests. They work on different platforms. They cover a lot of
> different areas. The risk that a regression in that layer could remain
> undetected is very low.
> >
> > Automated testing ran its 940 autotests (in BVT, FVT, SVT and PVT) on
> different operating systems for 32bit and 64bit versions. The
> cross-correlation between pre- and post-switch builds is the same as the
> auto-correlation for test reruns: the same tests were successful on both
> sides, the same tests failed for both sides.
> >
>
> This is great. Thanks for giving attention to the quality side of this.
>
> A change like this is unlikely to introduce a subtle bug in only one
> place. If it breaks things it should be spectacular. So the fact that
> nothing is seen yet is a good sign.
>
> -Rob
>

Yes, thanks Herbert for all this information. And, I see I should start
thinking about upgrading to GCC 4.8.1 to comply with C++ 11....really
thanks for posting this.


>
>
> > Herbert
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


--=20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------------
MzK

"You can't believe one thing and do another.
 What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
                             -- Leonard Peltier

--047d7b2e0c655d737104de094b08--