[vote] OpenOffice Release Candidate 4.1.6 RC1

Thanks for the vote.

To make it an official vote I miss the following information:

- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

Thanks

Marcus

Post by Peter Kovacs
This is about a small maintenance Release. We fix various Issues.
Please take your vote.

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

Patricia Shanahan

2018-10-31 22:34:20 UTC

Since this is a release vote, it is governed by the Apache policy on
Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval

"Before casting +1 binding votes, individuals are REQUIRED to download
all signed source code packages onto their own hardware, verify that
they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases as described below,
validate all cryptographic signatures, compile as provided, and test the
result on their own platform."

Because of the extent to which our users depend on the compiled
packages, if I were participating in the vote I would also download and
test some of them, but building from signed source is required for a
binding +1.

Post by Marcus
Thanks for the vote.
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.
Thanks
Marcus

Post by Peter Kovacs
This is about a small maintenance Release. We fix various Issues.
Please take your vote.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Pedro Lino

2018-11-01 08:59:16 UTC

Hi all

I really would like to build from source (at least under Linux)!

But first I found a problem checking the src file integrity.

I'm using Double Commander's option Verify Checksum and all sha256 work correctly.

However for the sha512, the content of the file is

SHA512(./apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2)= eea09bea287059d8cb9e4107ba49f5bc0b46540c491175310ddef303e93fe114c37232471959ae49826d48d39b059b1c2d6d10a99e3cd44a1c75785ece7afdf4

but the program expects

eea09bea287059d8cb9e4107ba49f5bc0b46540c491175310ddef303e93fe114c37232471959ae49826d48d39b059b1c2d6d10a99e3cd44a1c75785ece7afdf4 *apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2

The generated string is exactly the same so sha512 is correct.
Is this a limitation of the program I'm using? Is everybody else able to use the sha512 file?

Thanks,
Pedro

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

Marcus

2018-11-01 20:15:33 UTC

Post by Pedro Lino
I really would like to build from source (at least under Linux)!
But first I found a problem checking the src file integrity.
I'm using Double Commander's option Verify Checksum and all sha256 work correctly.
However for the sha512, the content of the file is
SHA512(./apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2)= eea09bea287059d8cb9e4107ba49f5bc0b46540c491175310ddef303e93fe114c37232471959ae49826d48d39b059b1c2d6d10a99e3cd44a1c75785ece7afdf4
but the program expects
eea09bea287059d8cb9e4107ba49f5bc0b46540c491175310ddef303e93fe114c37232471959ae49826d48d39b059b1c2d6d10a99e3cd44a1c75785ece7afdf4 *apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2
The generated string is exactly the same so sha512 is correct.
Is this a limitation of the program I'm using? Is everybody else able to use the sha512 file?

I've tried myself und this is the result:

[21:09:11 ***@fedora aoo]$ sha256sum -c
apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2.sha256
apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2: OK

[21:09:37 ***@fedora aoo]$ sha512sum -c
apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2.sha512
./apache-openoffice-4.1.6-r1844436-src.tar.bz2: OK

Please can you check it with the board-tools of Ubuntu? I think you also
should have sha256sum and sha512sum as commands.

Marcus

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

Pedro Lino

2018-11-01 23:00:09 UTC

Hi Marcus

Post by Marcus
Please can you check it with the board-tools of Ubuntu? I think you also
should have sha256sum and sha512sum as commands.

It does work for the src file with sha512sum so Double Commander is less versatile. But wouldn't it make sense to keep the two SHA files similar (i.e. <checksum_value> *<filename>?

Actually there is a bigger problem with the SHA512 files for _all_ the binaries in the RC1 folder: they include the folder name

Example
SHA512(./en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb

Should be
SHA512(./Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb

Or even easier

c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb *Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz

Thanks!
Pedro

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

Marcus

2018-11-01 23:28:48 UTC

Post by Marcus
Please can you check it with the board-tools of Ubuntu? I think you also
should have sha256sum and sha512sum as commands.

It does work for the src file with sha512sum so Double Commander is less versatile. But wouldn't it make sense to keep the two SHA files similar (i.e. <checksum_value> *<filename>?
Actually there is a bigger problem with the SHA512 files for _all_ the binaries in the RC1 folder: they include the folder name
Example
SHA512(./en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Should be
SHA512(./Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Or even easier
c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb *Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz

AFAIK the data is created by a script. I haven't checked, so it's
possible that the way of creation is different for both. Or that they
are done by 2 different persons.

It would be indeed better to have all check sums in the same style.

Is it possible to do this before we have the release?

Thanks

Marcus

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-02 00:33:56 UTC

Hi Marcus,

Post by Marcus
Please can you check it with the board-tools of Ubuntu? I think you also
should have sha256sum and sha512sum as commands.

It does work for the src file with sha512sum so Double Commander is
less versatile. But wouldn't it make sense to keep the two SHA files
similar (i.e. <checksum_value> *<filename>?
Actually there is a bigger problem with the SHA512 files for _all_
the binaries in the RC1 folder: they include the folder name
Example
SHA512(./en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)=
c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Should be
SHA512(./Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)=
c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Or even easier
c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
*Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz

I have just corrected the script to have identical output for SHA256 and
SHA512.

Post by Marcus
AFAIK the data is created by a script. I haven't checked, so it's
possible that the way of creation is different for both. Or that they
are done by 2 different persons.
It would be indeed better to have all check sums in the same style.
Is it possible to do this before we have the release?

I remember that we had the same problem with included paths for 4.1.5
(Not for Windows files, as I generate them separate for every
directory). Jim corrected that before the release of 4.1.5.

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Marcus
Thanks
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Pedro Lino

2018-11-02 10:35:37 UTC

Hi Matthias, all

Post by Matthias Seidel
I have just corrected the script to have identical output for SHA256 and
SHA512.

Thank you! It works correctly with any program!

Post by Marcus
AFAIK the data is created by a script. I haven't checked, so it's

possible that the way of creation is different for both. Or that they
are done by 2 different persons.

Post by Marcus
It would be indeed better to have all check sums in the same style.
Is it possible to do this before we have the release?
I remember that we had the same problem with included paths for 4.1.5

(Not for Windows files, as I generate them separate for every
directory). Jim corrected that before the release of 4.1.5.

If your new script is used for all the binaries it would be perfect.

Best regards,

Pedro

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-02 15:28:26 UTC

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Matthias, all

Post by Matthias Seidel
I have just corrected the script to have identical output for SHA256 and
SHA512.

Thank you! It works correctly with any program!

Post by Marcus
AFAIK the data is created by a script. I haven't checked, so it's

possible that the way of creation is different for both. Or that they
are done by 2 different persons.

(Not for Windows files, as I generate them separate for every
directory). Jim corrected that before the release of 4.1.5.

If your new script is used for all the binaries it would be perfect.

I will renew all SHA512 hash files for my Windows builds soon. I only
did it for the source first...

Maybe Jim can update his files and (if possible) change the script to
leave out the paths?

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Pedro Lino
Best regards,
Pedro

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-03 18:48:53 UTC

I'm not exactly sure 100% what needs to be changed... Plus, if we change the names of files, don't we need to ensure that the sourceforge links are correct as well? Has that been looked at?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-05 17:17:10 UTC

Hi Jim,

Post by Jim Jagielski
I'm not exactly sure 100% what needs to be changed... Plus, if we change the names of files, don't we need to ensure that the sourceforge links are correct as well? Has that been looked at?

I assume you are referring to our discussion about the SHA512 files?

Post by Jim Jagielski
Actually there is a bigger problem with the SHA512 files for _all_ the binaries in the RC1 folder: they include the folder name
Example
SHA512(./en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Should be
SHA512(./Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz)= c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb
Or even easier
c8caa278fd881be393ad2905ef1c89d5e96710ab4d758c254102b2f9f6fbca21ad9bfba8ef375b13b3d982da0627d195ac40dbd9e7aa10c780b6d2ea6891bcfb *Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.6_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
Thanks!
Pedro

There was a little problem in our script "hash-sign.sh", which is now
solved (hopefully).

I did correct all sha512 files for the Windows builds, so the ones for
macOS and Linux32/64 remain to be updated.

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-05 18:27:55 UTC

Post by Matthias Seidel
I did correct all sha512 files for the Windows builds, so the ones for
macOS and Linux32/64 remain to be updated.

What needs to be done, exactly?

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-05 18:48:57 UTC

Post by Matthias Seidel
I did correct all sha512 files for the Windows builds, so the ones for
macOS and Linux32/64 remain to be updated.

What needs to be done, exactly?

You are faster than I can explain it... ;-)

Thanks!

Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-06 14:35:08 UTC

Hi Pedro,

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Matthias, all

Post by Matthias Seidel
I have just corrected the script to have identical output for SHA256 and
SHA512.

Thank you! It works correctly with any program!

Post by Marcus
AFAIK the data is created by a script. I haven't checked, so it's

possible that the way of creation is different for both. Or that they
are done by 2 different persons.

(Not for Windows files, as I generate them separate for every
directory). Jim corrected that before the release of 4.1.5.

If your new script is used for all the binaries it would be perfect.

Everything should be correct now... ;-)

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Pedro Lino
Best regards,
Pedro

Pedro Lino

2018-11-06 15:43:30 UTC

Hi Matthias

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Pedro,

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Matthias, all
I have just corrected the script to have identical output for SHA256 and
SHA512.
Everything should be correct now... ;-)

It is. It works perfectly. Thank you and Jim for the quick fix!

Best,

Pedro

Pedro Lino

2018-11-01 11:49:43 UTC

Hi Patricia

I'm taking this opportunity to write to you directly (I hope this is not a problem)

Do you have experience building in Linux?

I have found this obstacle but no one on the dev mailing list answered (which worries me since I have been trying to contribute to this project...)

Any idea how to solve these dependencies problem?

Thank you in advance!

Best,
Pedro

***@Latitude-E6520:/$ sudo apt-get install bison flex libarchive-zip-perl libcups2-dev libpam0g-dev gperf libfreetype6-dev libxaw7-dev libfontconfig1-dev libxrandr-dev patch libgconf2-dev libgnomevfs2-dev ant libgtk2.0-dev junit junit4 libidl-dev liborbit2-dev libwww-perl libxml-parser-perl autoconf libssl-dev libpam-dev libgstreamer\*
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libpam0g-dev' instead of 'libpam-dev'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-vaapi1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-0v5' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-0-dbg' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-doc' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-5f1y4:i386' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-dh5s9' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-5f1y4:i386' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-0-dbg' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-java' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dh5s9' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dh5s9'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-dh5s9'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml:i386' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-5f1y4:i386'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-5f1y4:i386'
autoconf is already the newest version (2.69-9).
autoconf set to manually installed.
libwww-perl is already the newest version (6.15-1).
libwww-perl set to manually installed.
libxml-parser-perl is already the newest version (2.44-1build1).
libxml-parser-perl set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-ocaml is already the newest version (0.2.0-2build2).
libgstreamer0.10-0 is already the newest version (0.10.36-1.5ubuntu1).
libgstreamer0.10-0 set to manually installed.
libarchive-zip-perl is already the newest version (1.56-2ubuntu0.1).
libarchive-zip-perl set to manually installed.
libfontconfig1-dev is already the newest version (2.11.94-0ubuntu1.1).
libfontconfig1-dev set to manually installed.
libfreetype6-dev is already the newest version (2.6.1-0.1ubuntu2.3).
libfreetype6-dev set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.4).
libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1~ubuntu0.1).
libgstreamer1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer1.0-dev is already the newest version (1.8.3-1~ubuntu0.1).
libssl-dev is already the newest version (1.0.2g-1ubuntu4.13).
libssl-dev set to manually installed.
patch is already the newest version (2.7.5-1ubuntu0.16.04.1).
patch set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 is already the newest version (0.10.36-2ubuntu0.1).
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 set to manually installed.
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgstreamer-ocaml : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 : Depends: ocaml-base-nox-4.02.3:i386
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 : Depends: ocaml-nox-4.02.3:i386
Depends: libgstreamer1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: ocaml-findlib:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-01 11:57:02 UTC

I did not see this post from you.

Which Distro do you use?

You need Gstreamer 0.1.0 for OpenOffice 4.1.x series, if you want
Multimedia.

Support for Gstreamer 1.0.0 is included in 4.2.0.

All the best

Peter

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Patricia
I'm taking this opportunity to write to you directly (I hope this is not a problem)
Do you have experience building in Linux?
I have found this obstacle but no one on the dev mailing list answered (which worries me since I have been trying to contribute to this project...)
Any idea how to solve these dependencies problem?
Thank you in advance!
Best,
Pedro
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libpam0g-dev' instead of 'libpam-dev'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-vaapi1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-0v5' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-0-dbg' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamermm-1.0-doc' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-5f1y4:i386' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad0.10-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-dh5s9' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-5f1y4:i386' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer0.10-0-dbg' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-java' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer1.0-0' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dh5s9' for glob 'libgstreamer*'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dh5s9'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-dh5s9'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml:i386' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-5f1y4:i386'
Note, selecting 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386' instead of 'libgstreamer-ocaml-dev-5f1y4:i386'
autoconf is already the newest version (2.69-9).
autoconf set to manually installed.
libwww-perl is already the newest version (6.15-1).
libwww-perl set to manually installed.
libxml-parser-perl is already the newest version (2.44-1build1).
libxml-parser-perl set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-ocaml is already the newest version (0.2.0-2build2).
libgstreamer0.10-0 is already the newest version (0.10.36-1.5ubuntu1).
libgstreamer0.10-0 set to manually installed.
libarchive-zip-perl is already the newest version (1.56-2ubuntu0.1).
libarchive-zip-perl set to manually installed.
libfontconfig1-dev is already the newest version (2.11.94-0ubuntu1.1).
libfontconfig1-dev set to manually installed.
libfreetype6-dev is already the newest version (2.6.1-0.1ubuntu2.3).
libfreetype6-dev set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.4).
libgstreamer-plugins-good1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1~ubuntu0.1).
libgstreamer1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer1.0-dev is already the newest version (1.8.3-1~ubuntu0.1).
libssl-dev is already the newest version (1.0.2g-1ubuntu4.13).
libssl-dev set to manually installed.
patch is already the newest version (2.7.5-1ubuntu0.16.04.1).
patch set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 is already the newest version (0.10.36-2ubuntu0.1).
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 set to manually installed.
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
libgstreamer-ocaml : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 : Depends: ocaml-base-nox-4.02.3:i386
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 : Depends: ocaml-nox-4.02.3:i386
Depends: libgstreamer1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: ocaml-findlib:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Patricia Shanahan

2018-11-01 12:44:44 UTC

Your mail actually went to dev@, which is fine because I have no
experience building AOO on Linux, and dev@ is the right place to ask for
help. You should use a more appropriate subject.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

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

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-01 13:09:23 UTC

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Patricia
I'm taking this opportunity to write to you directly (I hope this is not a problem)
Do you have experience building in Linux?

...

Post by Pedro Lino
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 is already the newest version (1.8.3-1ubuntu0.2).
libgstreamer-plugins-bad1.0-0 set to manually installed.
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 is already the newest version (0.10.36-2ubuntu0.1).
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 set to manually installed.
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
libgstreamer-ocaml : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 : Depends: ocaml-base-nox-4.02.3:i386
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 : Depends: ocaml-nox-4.02.3:i386
Depends: libgstreamer1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: ocaml-findlib:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

This does not look like a AOO source code or distro problem, per se, but rather user error. My first instinct would be to select *either* gstreamer 1.0 or .10 and not both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org

Pedro Lino

2018-11-01 17:03:36 UTC

Hi Jim, all

Post by Jim Jagielski
...

This does not look like a AOO source code or distro problem, per se, but rather user error. My first instinct would be to select *either* gstreamer 1.0 or .10 and not both.

One is named libgstreamer-plugins-bad and the other one libgstreamer-plugins-base
So I assume that those are different packages and therefore the fact that they are different versions should not be relevant?

Maybe the problem is related to the fact that my OS is x64 while some required libraries are i386?

How can I specify that I want to install the i386 version of a given package?

Post by Pedro Lino
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
libgstreamer-ocaml : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml:i386 : Depends: ocaml-base-nox-4.02.3:i386
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev : Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
libgstreamer-ocaml-dev:i386 : Depends: ocaml-nox-4.02.3:i386
Depends: libgstreamer1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgstreamer-plugins-base1.0-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: ocaml-findlib:i386 but it is not going to be installed
Conflicts: libgstreamer-ocaml-dev but 0.2.0-2build2 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

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

Marcus

2018-11-01 20:05:22 UTC

Post by Jim Jagielski
...

This does not look like a AOO source code or distro problem, per se, but rather user error. My first instinct would be to select *either* gstreamer 1.0 or .10 and not both.

it doesn't matter if you have the base, good or bad or ... package. But
the version number must be the same for all.

Correct:
libgstreamer-plugins-base-0.10-0
libgstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10-0

Problem:
libgstreamer-plugins-base-0.10-0
libgstreamer-plugins-bad-1.0-0

Post by Pedro Lino
Maybe the problem is related to the fact that my OS is x64 while some required libraries are i386?

No really, but Of course all packages need to be x386 *or* x64. Mixing
these lead also to problems.

Post by Pedro Lino
How can I specify that I want to install the i386 version of a given package?

A quick search via Google gave me this (I hope you are using Ubuntu):

https://superuser.com/questions/741380/how-to-install-i386-package-under-amd64-ubuntu-debian

HTH

Marcus

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

Pedro Lino

2018-11-01 23:21:05 UTC

Hi Marcus

Post by Marcus
it doesn't matter if you have the base, good or bad or ... package. But
the version number must be the same for all.
libgstreamer-plugins-base-0.10-0
libgstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10-0
libgstreamer-plugins-base-0.10-0
libgstreamer-plugins-bad-1.0-0

Ok. Thank you for the explanation.

Post by Pedro Lino
Maybe the problem is related to the fact that my OS is x64 while some required libraries are i386?

No really, but Of course all packages need to be x386 *or* x64. Mixing
these lead also to problems.

Post by Pedro Lino
How can I specify that I want to install the i386 version of a given package?

https://superuser.com/questions/741380/how-to-install-i386-package-under-amd64-ubuntu-debian

Thanks.

Unfortunately I ran the install command line to look for errors and Ubuntu reported there were new versions of a huge number of packages and after I installed them, no more errors showed up and building seems to be running smoothly :)
(I said unfortunately because I really don't like when problems get fixed without any logic...)

Thank you again for your patience ;)

Best regards
Pedro

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

Marcus

2018-11-01 23:32:43 UTC

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Marcus

Ok. Thank you for the explanation.

Post by Pedro Lino
Maybe the problem is related to the fact that my OS is x64 while some required libraries are i386?

No really, but Of course all packages need to be x386 *or* x64. Mixing
these lead also to problems.

Post by Pedro Lino
How can I specify that I want to install the i386 version of a given package?

https://superuser.com/questions/741380/how-to-install-i386-package-under-amd64-ubuntu-debian

great that it works now.

Dependency errors can be very ugly to handle. So, maybe you should be
happy even you don't know what the root cause is. ;-)

Marcus

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

Andrea Pescetti

2018-11-04 23:07:53 UTC

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Yes please, let's try to be reasonably serious about releases: due to
legal implications (among other things), there are some formalities that
are required; nothing more than what we did for any other Release
Candidate in history.

I assume we are voting on (this is the only 4.1.6-RC1 available, but it
needs to be recorded in the vote discussion!)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

Elsewhere Peter mentioned until Wednesday 7 November but again this
should be in the vote thread (so, here).

And most important: the Release Manager (Peter) must sign the source
files. I've just spent a lot of time trying to make sense of various
ways to have multiple signature in one file, concluding that it is easy
to do that for a binary signature, but it is a hack to do so for the
ASCII-armored signatures we use.

So, in short, Peter as the Release Manager should rectify things by:

1) Confirming that the URL and deadline above are correct

2) Replace, before the vote ends, current signatures with only his
signature as follows:

$ svn checkout
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/source
$ rm *.asc
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.bz2
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.gz
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.zip
$ svn commit

About this second item, I see that Matthias concatenated his signature
to Jim's one: this is possible for the binary format but GPG will
complain if this is done for the ASCII format, and as you can see by
searching the net there is no clean way to do it. I checked back in
version 4.1.2 (that was signed by Juergen and me) and I found out that I
had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I was
the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.

Regards,
Andrea.

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-04 23:22:33 UTC

Hi Andrea,

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Yes please, let's try to be reasonably serious about releases: due to
legal implications (among other things), there are some formalities
that are required; nothing more than what we did for any other Release
Candidate in history.
I assume we are voting on (this is the only 4.1.6-RC1 available, but
it needs to be recorded in the vote discussion!)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

Elsewhere Peter mentioned until Wednesday 7 November but again this
should be in the vote thread (so, here).
And most important: the Release Manager (Peter) must sign the source
files. I've just spent a lot of time trying to make sense of various
ways to have multiple signature in one file, concluding that it is
easy to do that for a binary signature, but it is a hack to do so for
the ASCII-armored signatures we use.
1) Confirming that the URL and deadline above are correct
2) Replace, before the vote ends, current signatures with only his
$ svn checkout
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/source
$ rm *.asc
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.bz2
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.gz
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.zip
$ svn commit
About this second item, I see that Matthias concatenated his signature
to Jim's one: this is possible for the binary format but GPG will
complain if this is done for the ASCII format, and as you can see by
searching the net there is no clean way to do it. I checked back in
version 4.1.2 (that was signed by Juergen and me) and I found out that
I had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I
was the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.

I found double signatures in 4.1.3:
https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/source/apache-openoffice-4.1.3-r1761381-src.zip.asc

But yes, GPG complains about it and will only verify the first. So
Peter's signature should be the only one...

(Of course he could also use our hash-sign.sh, which is fixed now for
SHA512).

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Andrea Pescetti
Regards,
Â Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter kovacs

2018-11-05 06:41:27 UTC

Source signing will be done tonight.
Thanks Andrea for the detailed line-up.
Also I hope all requirements are met in the second mail.
However there seems a misunderstanding on Keith side. It is not required to vote all test marks.
It is required to fill in general and then what OS Version you have tested and if you have tested from source or not.
Simone state in order to create a binding vote it has to be tested from source.
We need 3 of those.
Also we should have an overview which Binaries has been reviewed.

That is all.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Andrea,

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Release

Post by Andrea Pescetti
Candidate in history.
I assume we are voting on (this is the only 4.1.6-RC1 available, but
it needs to be recorded in the vote discussion!)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

signature

Post by Andrea Pescetti
to Jim's one: this is possible for the binary format but GPG will
complain if this is done for the ASCII format, and as you can see by
searching the net there is no clean way to do it. I checked back in
version 4.1.2 (that was signed by Juergen and me) and I found out

that

Post by Andrea Pescetti
I had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I
was the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.

https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/source/apache-openoffice-4.1.3-r1761381-src.zip.asc
But yes, GPG complains about it and will only verify the first. So
Peter's signature should be the only one...
(Of course he could also use our hash-sign.sh, which is fixed now for
SHA512).
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Andrea Pescetti
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Keith N. McKenna

2018-11-05 15:09:22 UTC

Post by Peter kovacs
Source signing will be done tonight.
Thanks Andrea for the detailed line-up.
Also I hope all requirements are met in the second mail.
However there seems a misunderstanding on Keith side. It is not required to vote all test marks.
It is required to fill in general and then what OS Version you have tested and if you have tested from source or not.
Simone state in order to create a binding vote it has to be tested from source.
We need 3 of those.
Also we should have an overview which Binaries has been reviewed.

Peter;

Post by Peter kovacs
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.

Looking at the above through the lens of a newcomer to the project
wanting to participate in there first vote the description of the
requirements of a normal vote, as opposed to the binding vote described
above it vote above it, requires that I download and compile the source.
If that was not the intention you meant to convey I truly apologize. The
description of the 2 types of possible votes does created confusion in
the mind of at least this one individual.

Regards
Keith

Post by Peter kovacs
That is all.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Andrea,

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Release

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

signature

that

Post by Andrea Pescetti
I had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I
was the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.

Post by Andrea Pescetti
Regards,
Â Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Fisher

2018-11-05 15:19:07 UTC

Sent from my iPhone

Post by Keith N. McKenna

Peter;

I am confused too. Since I’ve never been able to build 4.1.x on my MacOS (I could build 3.4) I guess I can’t make a binding vote and won’t do so.

My practice had been to validate the source release and test the Mac releases. To me that was enough.

Good luck.

Regards,
Dave

Post by Keith N. McKenna
Regards
Keith

Post by Peter kovacs
That is all.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Andrea,

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Release

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

signature

that

Post by Andrea Pescetti
I had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I
was the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.

Post by Andrea Pescetti
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-05 16:00:08 UTC

Post by Dave Fisher
My practice had been to validate the source release and test the Mac releases. To me that was enough.

Keith N. McKenna

2018-11-05 01:44:01 UTC

Post by Marcus
- What exactly do we vote for (link to the source and binaries)?

Yes please, let's try to be reasonably serious about releases: due to
legal implications (among other things), there are some formalities that
are required; nothing more than what we did for any other Release
Candidate in history.
I assume we are voting on (this is the only 4.1.6-RC1 available, but it
needs to be recorded in the vote discussion!)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/

Post by Marcus
- What is the time for the vote? Please more than just the normal 72
hours so that we all can use a weekend for more testing.

Elsewhere Peter mentioned until Wednesday 7 November but again this
should be in the vote thread (so, here).
And most important: the Release Manager (Peter) must sign the source
files. I've just spent a lot of time trying to make sense of various
ways to have multiple signature in one file, concluding that it is easy
to do that for a binary signature, but it is a hack to do so for the
ASCII-armored signatures we use.
1) Confirming that the URL and deadline above are correct
2) Replace, before the vote ends, current signatures with only his
$ svn checkout
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/source
$ rm *.asc
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.bz2
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.gz
$ gpg -a -b --digest-algo=SHA512 *.zip
$ svn commit
About this second item, I see that Matthias concatenated his signature
to Jim's one: this is possible for the binary format but GPG will
complain if this is done for the ASCII format, and as you can see by
searching the net there is no clean way to do it. I checked back in
version 4.1.2 (that was signed by Juergen and me) and I found out that I
had simply replaced Juergen's signature with mine in that case (I was
the Release Manager for 4.1.2). We can do the same this time.
Regards,
Â Andrea.

In his second vote announcement Peter also specified that to cast a
non-binding vote one still had to download and compile the source on
ones own machine and then test that binary. This is far over and above
anything that has ever been required for a non-binding vote.

Regards
Keith

Andrea Pescetti

2018-11-05 16:54:37 UTC

Post by Keith N. McKenna
In his second vote announcement Peter also specified that to cast a
non-binding vote one still had to download and compile the source on
ones own machine and then test that binary. This is far over and above
anything that has ever been required for a non-binding vote.

Whether a vote is binding or not depends entirely on the role: due to
legal issues, votes from PMC members are (always) "binding", meaning
that they are counted separately, even though everyone is welcome to vote.

We need to have on record at least three PMC members who built from
source and tested for the vote to be considered valid. The threshold of
three is a hard requirement.

While building would be required of other people too, we've historically
not been very rigid on this, provided that voters in general, so both
PMC members and people from the community at large, simply write (a
subset of) what they did.

Summarizing:

- If you, PMC member or not, feel that the release is good enough,
please do vote and say something "+1; I tested the Italian version on
MacOS, opened ODF and .docx files, everything was OK" and nobody will
ask you whether you built from source or not; this is very valuable
feedback as we would have very limited platform/language coverage otherwise.

- In order to close the vote successfully, at least 3 PMC members must
explicitly write in their statement that they built from source and
tested their own builds. This ensures we meet the minimum requirements.

Regards,
Andrea.

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-05 22:11:09 UTC

actually I tried to make a clear form and got confused all the way.

Since there is no change in process, please follow the instructions below.

We should have a fixed email for this, maybe we have and I just lacked
the memory to remeber.

So now the rules state I should sign all artifacts. Others may
concatenate their signature if they want. Do we follow this?

Whether a vote is binding or not depends entirely on the role: due to
legal issues, votes from PMC members are (always) "binding", meaning
that they are counted separately, even though everyone is welcome to vote.
We need to have on record at least three PMC members who built from
source and tested for the vote to be considered valid. The threshold
of three is a hard requirement.
While building would be required of other people too, we've
historically not been very rigid on this, provided that voters in
general, so both PMC members and people from the community at large,
simply write (a subset of) what they did.
- If you, PMC member or not, feel that the release is good enough,
please do vote and say something "+1; I tested the Italian version on
MacOS, opened ODF and .docx files, everything was OK" and nobody will
ask you whether you built from source or not; this is very valuable
feedback as we would have very limited platform/language coverage otherwise.
- In order to close the vote successfully, at least 3 PMC members must
explicitly write in their statement that they built from source and
tested their own builds. This ensures we meet the minimum requirements.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Andrea Pescetti

2018-11-05 22:21:41 UTC

Post by Peter Kovacs
So now the rules state I should sign all artifacts. Others may
concatenate their signature if they want. Do we follow this?

No, you need to sign only three files, the three source files. And you
should remove the existing three corresponding .asc files since multiple
signatures in the same .asc file are not officially supported. So others
should not append signatures. All details are in my message.

Regards,
Andrea.

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-06 05:55:04 UTC

Ok. This is done.

Post by Peter Kovacs
So now the rules state I should sign all artifacts. Others may
concatenate their signature if they want. Do we follow this?

No, you need to sign only three files, the three source files. And you
should remove the existing three corresponding .asc files since
multiple signatures in the same .asc file are not officially
supported. So others should not append signatures. All details are in
my message.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Larry Gusaas

2018-11-01 03:26:57 UTC

Where can I download 4.1.6 RC1 for macOS?

On 2018-10-31, 3:20 PM Peter Kovacs wrote concerning "[vote] OpenOffice Release Candidate 4.1.6
RC1":
--
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com

"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-01 06:52:31 UTC

Let's try again.

Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.

The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.

The binaries and the source for testing are to be taken from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/

We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval

In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to

* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,

* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,

* validate all cryptographic signatures,

* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.

In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to

* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,

* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,

* validate all cryptographic signatures,

* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.

[ ] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1

I have tested

Windows Release

[ ] source / binding

[ ] binary

Linux Release 32 bit

[ ] source / binding

[ ] binary

Linux Release 64 bit

[ ] source / binding

[ ] binary

MacOSX Release

[ ] source / binding

[ ] binary

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-02 10:29:42 UTC

+1 for release! Thx for RMing.

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[+1] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[X] source / binding
[X] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[X] source / binding
[X] binary
MacOSX Release
[X] source / binding
[X] binary

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

Roberto Galoppini

2018-11-02 12:14:28 UTC

+1.

Post by Jim Jagielski
+1 for release! Thx for RMing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post by Peter Kovacs
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[+1] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[X] source / binding
[X] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[X] source / binding
[X] binary
MacOSX Release
[X] source / binding
[X] binary

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Pedro Lino

2018-11-06 10:45:05 UTC

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.

[x ] yes / +1

I have tested

Windows Release

[ x] binary

Installed the Full Portuguese (pt) installer plus the en_US Language Pack

Linux Release 64 bit

[ x] source / binding

[ x] binary

Compiled and tested the resulting en_US x64 binaries

Downloaded and tested the x64 deb en_US binaries

Best regards,

Pedro

Josef Latt

2018-11-06 13:53:24 UTC

+1

Ubuntu 64 bit

Regards
Josef

Post by Peter Kovacs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[x ] yes / +1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ x] binary
Installed the Full Portuguese (pt) installer plus the en_US Language Pack
Linux Release 64 bit
[ x] source / binding
[ x] binary
Compiled and tested the resulting en_US x64 binaries
Downloaded and tested the x64 deb en_US binaries
Best regards,
Pedro

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-06 18:22:03 UTC

+1 (binding) from me.

The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.

[x] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1

I have tested

Windows Release

Â Â Â [x] source / binding

Â Â Â [x] binary

I built from source on Windows 10 (64-bit)

Binaries were tested on Windows 7 (64-bit and 32-bit)

Linux Release 32 bit

Â Â Â [ ] source / binding

Â Â Â [x] binary

Binary was tested on xubuntu 18.04.1 (32-bit)

Linux Release 64 bit

Â Â Â [ ] source / binding

Â Â Â [x] binary

Binary was tested on Ubuntu 16.04.5 (64-bit)

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Marcus

2018-11-06 21:56:02 UTC

Post by Peter Kovacs
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[X] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[X] binary

Windows 10 64-bit

German with en-US lang pack

- Verified signatures and SHA256 and SHA512 hash values

- Installing, starting and closing OpenOffice
- Opening some Writer and Calc documents / saving them
- Creating new Presentation and Drawing / closing and
opening them again / saving them again

Post by Peter Kovacs
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[X] binary

Fedora 21 64-bit (RPM)

en-US with German lang pack

- Verified signatures and SHA256 and SHA512 hash values

- Installing, starting and closing OpenOffice
- Opening some Writer and Calc documents / saving them
- Creating new Presentation and Drawing / closing and
opening them again / saving them again

Source files

- Verified signatures and SHA256 and SHA512 hash values

---

Why no own builds?

At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got back
a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build system to
also compile and test my own binaries. Sorry about this, hopefully I'm
back with the next release.

Marcus

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

Andrea Pescetti

2018-11-07 22:59:04 UTC

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got back
a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build system

Since I see that we don't have many people who built from source yet and
the vote deadline is approaching: I've also setup a new build system
from scratch (CentOS 7, so that I could fix and update the wiki
instructions since that will be our baseline for 4.2.0). But I'll need
about 24 hours more to complete my tests.

On the other hand (binaries), I'm not tracking feedback, but have we
received any feedback from people who installed the binaries on MacOS?
My tests will be on Linux64 so I won't contribute anything new in terms
of platforms.

Regards,
Andrea.

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

Marcus

2018-11-07 23:28:37 UTC

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got
back a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build
system

it's up to Peter as release manager if he will wait a few hours more. ;-)

Post by Andrea Pescetti
On the other hand (binaries), I'm not tracking feedback, but have we
received any feedback from people who installed the binaries on MacOS?
My tests will be on Linux64 so I won't contribute anything new in terms
of platforms.

From the vote replies I see that at least Jim and Roberto have tested
binaries and source for MacOS. And also Linux 32-bit which is also
underrepresented.

Marcus

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

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-08 13:32:59 UTC

Could we/Should we have some of us tweet that 4.1.6-RC1 is available and "ask" people to try it out...?

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got back a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build system

it's up to Peter as release manager if he will wait a few hours more. ;-)

On the other hand (binaries), I'm not tracking feedback, but have we received any feedback from people who installed the binaries on MacOS? My tests will be on Linux64 so I won't contribute anything new in terms of platforms.

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-08 06:29:17 UTC

Hi Andrea,

I extend the deadline until Saturday Morning CET. I hope this gives
everybody who wants to check another view days.

All the best

Peter

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got
back a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build
system

it's up to Peter as release manager if he will wait a few hours more. ;-)

Post by Andrea Pescetti
On the other hand (binaries), I'm not tracking feedback, but have we
received any feedback from people who installed the binaries on
MacOS? My tests will be on Linux64 so I won't contribute anything new
in terms of platforms.

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

Andrea Pescetti

2018-11-08 23:54:56 UTC

Post by Peter Kovacs
I extend the deadline until Saturday Morning CET.

Thanks! I've completed my tests tonight.

The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.

[X] yes / +1 (binding)

I have tested

Linux Release 64 bit

[X] source / binding

[X] binary

Further details: I've gone through my usual checks, that include:

- downloading and verifying the .bz2, .gz, .ZIP sources (checksums, hashes)

- making sure these match with SVN (I've tested the AOO416 branch, not
the tag, but they should be the same): once again they don't, but this
is due to minor differences annotated in
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127544 and not a blocker

- configured (English+Italian) and built source on Linux-64 (on a CentOS
7 system;
https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation%2FBuilding_Guide_AOO%2FStep_by_step&diff=244368&oldid=244281
updated accordingly)

- Installed RPM packages and verified that the build works (tested with
Writer and Calc) on another Linux-64 system

- verified LICENSE and NOTICE files

Additionally, I've used the 4.1.6-RC1 "convenience binaries" for light
testing:
- No regressions with respect to 4.1.5
- The update connects to the expected server
https://ooo-updates.apache.org/ but I've been unable to verify that it
actually retrieves the expected feed

Regards,
Andrea.

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

Jim Jagielski

2018-11-08 15:42:07 UTC

Could we/Should we have some of us tweet that 4.1.6-RC1 is available and "ask" people to try it out...?

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got back a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build system

it's up to Peter as release manager if he will wait a few hours more. ;-)

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-09 16:39:33 UTC

Hi Jim,

Post by Jim Jagielski
Could we/Should we have some of us tweet that 4.1.6-RC1 is available and "ask" people to try it out...?

I posted it on Google+ a while ago...

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Marcus
Why no own builds?
At the moment I'm very busy with my day job and just recently I got back a repaired laptop. So, had not yet the time to update my build system

it's up to Peter as release manager if he will wait a few hours more. ;-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Hagar Delest

2018-11-10 16:42:50 UTC

Post by Pedro Lino
Hi Jim,

Post by Jim Jagielski
Could we/Should we have some of us tweet that 4.1.6-RC1 is available and "ask" people to try it out...?

I posted it on Google+ a while ago...
Regards,
Matthias

Posted in the English forum also. Sorry for the late action.

Hagar

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

Kazunari Hirano

2018-11-09 00:25:31 UTC

Hi Peter and all,

+1
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.

I am sorry but I am late.

I installed japanese version and en-GB langpack on my Windows 10 machine.

They looks good.

Thanks.

khirano

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

--
***@apache.org
Apache OpenOffice
http://openoffice.apache.org

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-10 13:06:45 UTC

Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.

We have following test results:

*Who* *Passed* *Binding* *Windows* *
* *Linunx* *
* *MacOs* *
* *Language Attention* *Specials*

*Binary* *Source* *Binary* *Source* *Binary* *Source*

khirano 1
1

Japanese
Andrea 1 1

1 1

Italian
Marcus 1 1 1
1

US / German
Matthias 1 1 1 1 1

Included 32 bit Linux
Josef 1

1

Pedro 1
1
1 1

US / Portugese
Jim 1 1

1 1 1 1
Included 32 bit Linux
*summary* *7* *4* *4* *1* *6* *3* *1* *1*

We have the necessary Binding votes. All Target systems have been tested
from source and binary. We have a test coverage on diverse Languages.

The Vote has been made in favor for Release.

All the Best

Peter

Post by Kazunari Hirano
Hi Peter and all,
+1
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
I am sorry but I am late.
I installed japanese version and en-GB langpack on my Windows 10 machine.
They looks good.
Thanks.
khirano

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-11 10:56:38 UTC

Hi Peter,

Post by Peter Kovacs
Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.
*Who* *Passed* *Binding* *Windows* *
* *Linunx* *
* *MacOs* *
* *Language Attention* *Specials*
*Binary* *Source* *Binary* *Source* *Binary* *Source*
khirano 1
1
Japanese
Andrea 1 1
1 1
Italian
Marcus 1 1 1
1
US / German
Matthias 1 1 1 1 1
Included 32 bit Linux
Josef 1
1
Pedro 1
1
1 1
US / Portugese
Jim 1 1
1 1 1 1
Included 32 bit Linux
*summary* *7* *4* *4* *1* *6* *3* *1* *1*

Formatting is a bit weird...

Post by Peter Kovacs
We have the necessary Binding votes. All Target systems have been tested
from source and binary. We have a test coverage on diverse Languages.
The Vote has been made in favor for Release.

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)

Follow the steps described here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6

Regards,

Â Â Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-11 14:58:36 UTC

Formating was fine in my Email client...

Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.

All the best

Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

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

Peter Kovacs

2018-11-11 15:13:42 UTC

I think the next topic is writing release notes.

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6+Release+Notes

Who is available for this? The release blocker 4.1.6 "+" is telling you
what is in the release.

There is one exception. One Bug about updates is about our update
facility, and has no relevance to the Code.

All the Best

Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kay Schenk

2018-11-14 17:05:50 UTC

I got started a little on this yesterday. Maybe some guidance on fixed
bugs that need emphasis and any dictionary updates and anything else. I
have some time this week here and there.

------------------------------------------
MzK

"Less is MORE."

Post by Peter Kovacs
I think the next topic is writing release notes.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6+Release+Notes
Who is available for this? The release blocker 4.1.6 "+" is telling you
what is in the release.
There is one exception. One Bug about updates is about our update
facility, and has no relevance to the Code.
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
* download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own hardware,
* verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on releases
as described below,
* validate all cryptographic signatures,
* compile as provided, and test the result on their own platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary
MacOSX Release
[ ] source / binding
[ ] binary

---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Marcus

2018-11-14 21:09:52 UTC

Post by Kay Schenk
I got started a little on this yesterday. Maybe some guidance on fixed
bugs that need emphasis and any dictionary updates and anything else. I
have some time this week here and there.

thanks Kay, this would be great. If you want I can check the notes and
integrate the final version within the download webpage on Saturday.

Marcus

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Post by Peter Kovacs
Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.
*Who*     *Passed*     *Binding*     *Windows*     *
*     *Linunx*     *
*     *MacOs*     *
*     *Language Attention*     *Specials*
    *Binary*     *Source*     *Binary*     *Source*
*Binary*     *Source*
khirano     1
    1
    Japanese
Andrea     1     1
    1     1
    Italian
Marcus     1     1     1
    1
    US / German
Matthias     1     1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
Josef     1
    1
Pedro     1
    1
    1     1
    US / Portugese
Jim     1     1
    1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
*summary*     *7*     *4*     *4*     *1*     *6*     *3*
*1*     *1*

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own
hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own
hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
MacOSX Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary

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

Kay Schenk

2018-11-16 21:44:41 UTC

thanks Kay, this would be great. If you want I can check the notes and
integrate the final version within the download webpage on Saturday.
Marcus

Hi Marcus. Yes, please check. The bug list is rather short and I just
pulled out a few to highlight. I think the rest of the format can remain
as it was for 4.1.5. If you need the red caveat line removed let me
know, or feel free to do this.

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Post by Peter Kovacs
Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.
*Who*     *Passed*     *Binding*     *Windows*     *
*     *Linunx*     *
*     *MacOs*     *
*     *Language Attention*     *Specials*
    *Binary*     *Source*     *Binary*     *Source* *Binary*
*Source*
khirano     1
    1
    Japanese
Andrea     1     1
    1     1
    Italian
Marcus     1     1     1
    1
    US / German
Matthias     1     1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
Josef     1
    1
Pedro     1
    1
    1     1
    US / Portugese
Jim     1     1
    1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
*summary*     *7*     *4*     *4*     *1*     *6*     *3* *1*     *1*

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _source code_ packages onto their own
hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own
hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
MacOSX Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary

---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Marcus

2018-11-17 09:09:06 UTC

Post by Kay Schenk
I got started a little on this yesterday. Maybe some guidance on
fixed bugs that need emphasis and any dictionary updates and anything
else. I have some time this week here and there.

thanks Kay, this would be great. If you want I can check the notes and
integrate the final version within the download webpage on Saturday.
Marcus

thanks for your help. I've just changed some things to keep it visually
aligned with the previous version.

Marcus

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Post by Peter Kovacs
Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.
*Who*     *Passed*     *Binding*     *Windows*     *
*     *Linunx*     *
*     *MacOs*     *
*     *Language Attention*     *Specials*
    *Binary*     *Source*     *Binary*     *Source* *Binary*
*Source*
khirano     1
    1
    Japanese
Andrea     1     1
    1     1
    Italian
Marcus     1     1     1
    1
    US / German
Matthias     1     1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
Josef     1
    1
Pedro     1
    1
    1     1
    US / Portugese
Jim     1     1
    1     1     1     1
    Included 32 bit Linux
*summary*     *7*     *4*     *4*     *1*     *6*     *3* *1*
*1*

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _source code_ packages onto their
own hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
     * download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own
hardware,
     * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy on
releases
     as described below,
     * validate all cryptographic signatures,
     * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary
MacOSX Release
     [ ] source / binding
     [ ] binary

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

Matthias Seidel

2018-11-17 11:45:23 UTC

Hi Marcus,

Post by Kay Schenk
I got started a little on this yesterday. Maybe some guidance on
fixed bugs that need emphasis and any dictionary updates and
anything else. I have some time this week here and there.

thanks Kay, this would be great. If you want I can check the notes
and integrate the final version within the download webpage on
Saturday.
Marcus

Hi Marcus. Yes, please check. The bug list is rather short and I just
pulled out a few to highlight. I think the rest of the format can
remain as it was for 4.1.5. If you need the red caveat line removed
let me know, or feel free to do this.

thanks for your help. I've just changed some things to keep it
visually aligned with the previous version.

I think there is still some content doubled in the macOS section:

* For developers:
* For developers: the OpenOffice SDK won't build with Java 8. Either
build with --disable-odk or see the dev list archives for possible
solutions.

This is already some lines below.

Matthias

Post by Marcus
Marcus

Post by Peter Kovacs
Formating was fine in my Email client...
Wired. I just copied it quickly from a calc sheet. I upload it on the
release page.
All the best
Peter

Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,

Post by Peter Kovacs
Thanks for your efforts and participation. It is no issue if you are
early or late. Important is that you believe in the release.
*Who*Â Â Â Â *Passed*Â Â Â Â *Binding*Â Â Â Â *Windows*Â Â Â Â *
*Â Â Â Â *Linunx*Â Â Â Â *
*Â Â Â Â *MacOs*Â Â Â Â *
*Â Â Â Â *Language Attention*Â Â Â Â *Specials*
Â Â Â Â *Binary*Â Â Â Â *Source*Â Â Â Â *Binary*Â Â Â Â *Source* *Binary*
*Source*
khiranoÂ Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â Japanese
AndreaÂ Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â Italian
MarcusÂ Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â US / German
MatthiasÂ Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â Included 32 bit Linux
JosefÂ Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1
PedroÂ Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â US / Portugese
JimÂ Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â 1
Â Â Â Â Included 32 bit Linux
*summary*Â Â Â Â *7*Â Â Â Â *4*Â Â Â Â *4*Â Â Â Â *1*Â Â Â Â *6*Â Â Â Â *3*
*1*Â Â Â Â *1*

Formatting is a bit weird...

Great, then let us get this thing out! ;-)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.6
Regards,
Â Â Â Matthias

Post by Peter Kovacs
All the Best
Peter

Post by Peter Kovacs
Let's try again.
Welcome to the vote on Release Candidate 1 for the 4.1.6 Release.
The vote will close on Wednesday the 7.11.2018.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.6-RC1/
We follow the policy for the Apache policy on Release
Approval at
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
In order to create a binding vote individuals are REQUIRED to
Â Â Â Â * download all signed _source code_ packages onto their
own hardware,
Â Â Â Â * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy
on releases
Â Â Â Â as described below,
Â Â Â Â * validate all cryptographic signatures,
Â Â Â Â * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
In order to create a normal vote individuals are REQUIRED to
Â Â Â Â * download all signed _binary_ packages onto their own
hardware,
Â Â Â Â * verify that they meet all requirements of ASF policy
on releases
Â Â Â Â as described below,
Â Â Â Â * validate all cryptographic signatures,
Â Â Â Â * compile as provided, and test the result on their own
platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Release Candidate 1 for 4.1.6 has passed my tests.
[ ] yes / +1
[ ] no / -1
I have tested
Windows Release
Â Â Â Â [ ] source / binding
Â Â Â Â [ ] binary
Linux Release 32 bit
Â Â Â Â [ ] source / binding
Â Â Â Â [ ] binary
Linux Release 64 bit
Â Â Â Â [ ] source / binding
Â Â Â Â [ ] binary
MacOSX Release
Â Â Â Â [ ] source / binding
Â Â Â Â [ ] binary

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Marcus

2018-11-17 11:56:48 UTC

Post by Kay Schenk
I got started a little on this yesterday. Maybe some guidance on
fixed bugs that need emphasis and any dictionary updates and
anything else. I have some time this week here and there.

thanks Kay, this would be great. If you want I can check the notes
and integrate the final version within the download webpage on
Saturday.
Marcus

Hi Marcus. Yes, please check. The bug list is rather short and I just
pulled out a few to highlight. I think the rest of the format can
remain as it was for 4.1.5. If you need the red caveat line removed
let me know, or feel free to do this.

thanks for your help. I've just changed some things to keep it
visually aligned with the previous version.

* For developers: the OpenOffice SDK won't build with Java 8. Either
build with --disable-odk or see the dev list archives for possible
solutions.
This is already some lines below.

right, I've fixed this.

Thanks

Marcus