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 gcaod-devel@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
From: "Keith N. McKenna" <keith.mckenna@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [RELEASE]: propose a AOO 4.1.1 bugfix release as next release
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 18:48:16 -0400
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <lmqs5q$mj$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <53905EF9.4010009@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="FpCltPEuCI83ck5L4KjL77wpBtJjJooko"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
In-Reply-To: <53905EF9.4010009@gmail.com>

--FpCltPEuCI83ck5L4KjL77wpBtJjJooko
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

J=C3=BCrgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> over the last weeks we have seen some bugs that seems to be serious
> enough to provide a AOO 4.1.1 bugfix release. Well this is at least my
> opinion and I would like to volunteer again to manage such a bugfix
> release as acting release manager.
>=20
> The issue 124985 [1] can be seen as a meta issue where we have started
> to collect potential candidates for a AOO 4.1.1 bugfix release.
>=20
> If nobody has bigger concerns or arguments against such a bugfix releas=
e
> we can continue with a more detailed planning, like schedule,
> milestones, QA, detailed selection/proposing of blocker issues etc.
>=20
> I would like to keep the effort minimal because the main work should go=

> into a future release 4.2? It really depends what we can achieve when,
> you all noticed the ongoing OOXML project that we drive and we will not=

> enable this work when we are not satisfied that it is a good alternativ=
e
> and replacement for what we have today ;-)
>=20
> But before we continue I would like to hear other opinions.
>=20
> Juergen
>=20
>=20
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=3D124985
>=20
+1
Looking at the meta issue it appears that a 4.1.1 bug fix release would
be appropriate at this time.

Regards
Keith


--FpCltPEuCI83ck5L4KjL77wpBtJjJooko
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTkPPiAAoJEH0fu5UhGmBC38cH/2zgE/pdBZk3jdzTk+xyxan5
ogtJKtmBMOCTn9HnE63VLZjLyXx7tgIM5rS2AEmb1RT9qJJjZmWN+XDzQ9K2Ukfp
haaHd/0325/85Aa60maWWytIO90CGWHmbLb8nuXUm70xLcbtpDXKiX4KrXsrmKXI
dVRpTwpF695mZ5NRg4JGGhu+yhPBT2W2D3+bEKO94KTHKISzSUbhr8Z0cASJY2rt
uzYhWG32XNUqDDXTmEV43euQBAc/rkueBicyhlbhHWYnZXOSxvMgScXuhuoPdR+i
evaqKvgMp8/VL9nxGY3IBmC1zLUK36Cig1XcxurhWGTnpEEv7vozAzQkQGLD34U=
=4VrQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--FpCltPEuCI83ck5L4KjL77wpBtJjJooko--