ReleaseStatus Minutes 2009-09-14 IRC log

From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
Revision as of 19:03, 16 March 2010 by Ivanm (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

(14:56:07) Das Thema für #oooreleases ist: Release-Stauts-Meeting, every monday at 15:00 Hamburg Time (13:00 UTC in summer)
(15:00:12) ja_: Moin
(15:00:20) stefan_b: Moin!
(15:00:23) MechtiIde: hello
(15:00:52) ml1: tach
(15:01:49) mdamboldt [n=mdambold@nat/sun/x-wupqwvreyxvrylnu] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:01:57) mdamboldt: Hi
(15:02:19) rtimm [n=Ruediger@nat/sun/x-mykrgjsfdvifrdzl] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:02:57) kai_a hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
(15:03:21) mdamboldt: 3.2 time line
(15:03:54) _rene_: will all nominated cws go into m59? :-)
(15:04:05) mdamboldt: Last week there was a discussion about a possible Alpha/Beta schedule. Goal was to follow up on this topic in a separate meeting.
(15:04:31) mdamboldt: I will follow-up on this with MH since he was taking this action item.
(15:04:56) mdamboldt: _rene_: No. We already discussed this today with Release Engineering.
(15:05:36) _rene_: yay. that means some cwses already wait two milestones...
(15:05:38) mdamboldt: We will close the integration for the next round now. Yes, there are further nominated CWSs, but we close for now to get the next milestone asap.
(15:06:07) mdamboldt: Plan is to start integration for the next and last round before the branch off end of this week.
(15:06:16) MechtiIde: mdamboldt, I understand the goal that we take the timeline as described in the Wiki
(15:06:44) _rene_: can we at least take boost134 which was nominated on Sept, 8th?
(15:08:57) rtimm: _rene_: do you have concerns that something rottens especially on that CWS? Do you expect conflicts?
(15:09:17) _rene_: rtimm: I know of cwses which probably wait on this one to get work continued...
(15:09:34) rtimm: _rene_: and - is an updated boost version important for 3.2 release?
(15:11:14) _rene_: depends on what you plan with mysqlnative. (I personally think anyway we shouldn't do with a that ancient boost and a weird combo between 1.30 and 1.34 for various archs)
(15:12:07) _rene_: rtimm: I don't see the sense in your question anyway. come on, this was nominated long ago
(15:12:28) _rene_: rtimm: I think you just want to defend that you didn't integrated it yet because you oversaw it :)
(15:12:46) rtimm: _rene_: no, we left it out by intend
(15:13:18) _rene_: brilliant :-(
(15:13:34) rtimm: we had to do a short, fast milestone and tried to shift things, which perhaps are not so important. Trying to clarify importance now
(15:13:44) rtimm: That's why I am asking
(15:14:36) rtimm: Personally I'd love to clean up this version mess, but I do not know about the risk and the gain beside 'beauty'
(15:15:01) rtimm: So, if you can provide some arguments, you are wellcome
(15:15:28) _rene_: the cws is QAed. distros already build with newer boosts 1.39 for a loong time
(15:15:54) rtimm: OK, that's for the 'risk' part
(15:16:17) _rene_: and afaik, it was done with mysqlnative in mind.. (which I do think is important)
(15:17:28) _rene_: (but I am backporting it anyway and using system-boost anyway, so it doesn't affect me per se, but I'd be better to base on a integrated version than some cws extract on a random date). But I think that cws was the background of boost134
(15:18:02) Andreas_SunOOoUX [n=andreas_@nat/sun/x-wlfvrrueaelxjgvx] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:18:12) kai_a [] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:19:25) _rene_: for the rest of cws I agree with postponing, as long as they all are in the alpha release so those important fixes are in there and can be tested :-)
(15:19:26) MechtiIde: rtimm, does the mysql native connector work with the planned m59?
(15:19:40) _rene_: but I do think boost134 blocks further progress of mysqlnative...
(15:20:15) MechtiIde: older versions doesn't work with it
(15:20:17) _rene_: (which I do want to have in my packages asap to stop the disrimination of MySQL users compared to PostgreSQL ;-))
(15:21:08) _rene_: rtimm: and umm, why, is there no trace of whatever decision recorded anywhere?
(15:21:37) _rene_: rtimm: you integrated oj16, too which broke all distros' build. so risk is no argument, frankly speaking
(15:21:41) _rene_: eh, oj18
(15:21:50) cl: according to Frank S. mysqlnative does not need boost134 for a 3.2 release
(15:21:57) rtimm: Frank Schoenheit told me mysql connector does not rely on that boost update
(15:22:03) _rene_: ah, ok
(15:23:48) rtimm: _rene_: it has been more about how many childworkspaces put together in one build. Int the past we did not make so good experiance with milestones conatning 40+ childworkspaces.
(15:23:50) _rene_: still, it'd be nice to have. boost 1.40 is already released. Debian will move to it per default soon I think (I am not the boost maintainer)
(15:24:37) _rene_: I think having gap beteen 1.30(!) or 1.34 and 1.40 too big is sure to introduce some bugs when building
(15:25:49) _rene_: rtimm: ah, right, and that's why you included oj18 instead and broke the build? ;-)
(15:26:17) rtimm: _rene_: better this one that the branch milestone ;-)
(15:26:25) cl: _rene_: That is an unfair argument and it becomes less valid the more you use it
(15:26:25) rtimm: s/that/than/
(15:26:36) mdamboldt: At the end it sounds not that important to me whether we integrate both134 now or end of this week. Of course the current milesone may need less time if we integrate it in the next.
(15:26:53) rtimm: mdamboldt: correct
(15:26:55) _rene_: mdamboldt: true.
(15:27:20) _rene_: cl: wrong.
(15:27:36) _rene_: cl: you integrated a cws which was sure to break instead of a tested cws. that's the point :-)
(15:27:54) _rene_: cl: and then argument about risk :-)
(15:29:02) _rene_: ah, well...
(15:29:09) rtimm: _rene_: oj18 AFAIK had all bots green. Anyway, could we come to next toipc?
(15:29:23) _rene_: rtimm: that doesn't say anything
(15:29:28) _rene_: rtimm: and you know that
(15:30:20) _rene_: (yes, it's a bug that all the bots don't do --with-openldap)
(15:31:02) rtimm: _rene_: have you filed that bug?
(15:31:11) rtimm: mdamboldt: could we proceed, please?
(15:31:12) mdamboldt: Ok, next topc. Do we have any 3.2.0 relevant stoppers to disscuss today=
(15:31:31) _rene_: rtimm: of course
(15:32:04) _rene_: rtimm: and oj initially refused to even fix it though he himself broke it ;-)
(15:32:12) ja_: issue 105035
(15:32:16) _rene_: (now he has the issue back, thankfully)
(15:32:19) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT NEW P2 docx: document having drawing objects crashes OOo 3.2
(15:32:43) ja_: Michael Ruess mentioned this today
(15:32:53) _rene_: rtimm: fwiw
(15:33:00) IZBot: issue 105016: framework DEFECT NEW P2 extensions: ldap stuff fails to build in m58 with OpenLDAP
(15:34:02) rtimm: _rene_: no, I meant "it's a bug that all the bots don't do --with-openldap".
(15:34:37) rtimm: anyway, not our problem here ...
(15:35:10) _rene_: rtimm: I honestly don't care. people have to test their stuff. If I broke your build completely because I didn't care you would not be happy either
(15:35:19) mdamboldt: The following item has been put on todays agenda:
(15:35:21) mdamboldt: * Problems with the public buildbots: Too much pending builds in the queue.
(15:35:21) mdamboldt: So how should the community's QARep can do the QA of CWS builds?
(15:35:22) mdamboldt: We need to look for a solution
(15:35:24) _rene_: rtimm: actually you wouldn't probably not even integrate it. but the other way round....
(15:37:44) MechtiIde: mdamboldt, I wrote it into the wiki
(15:37:57) mdamboldt: Mechtilde: I'm not sure if theres somebody here today who can help on this topic!?
(15:38:37) MechtiIde: then we must ship it
(15:39:01) MechtiIde: but we may not forget it
(15:41:04) mdamboldt: Ok
(15:41:18) mdamboldt: Other items for todaY?
(15:41:48) ja_: should I note both issues as accepted for 3.2 ?
(15:42:22) mdamboldt: Sure
(15:42:44) _rene_: there's no discussion possible about 105016 anyway
(15:43:10) _rene_: unless you want the distros to build with --disable-ldap and disable that feature completely...
(15:43:48) mdamboldt: Thats all for today!?
(15:44:17) rtimm: mdamboldt: due to the amount of nominated childworkspaces I see 'branch off date' a bit on risk. It's just about one or two days, though.
(15:45:05) mdamboldt: Noted. We need to see how long it really takes at the end for current milestone before we can make more precise predictions for next one.
(15:45:31) rtimm: Yes, exactly.
(15:45:34) ja_: Kurt Zenker will work on m59. Marcus already uploaded m58 (again) and this version will soon have mirrorbrain links available.
(15:45:52) mdamboldt: Ok
(15:45:58) mdamboldt: bye
(15:46:02) MechtiIde: ja_, thanks for this information
(15:46:07) ***_rene_ sighs. just another wasted milestone for proper testing...
(15:46:24) mdamboldt heißt jetzt mdamboldt_away
(15:46:41) rtimm: bye bye
(15:47:36) ja_: bye

Personal tools