ReleaseStatus Minutes 2008-09-15 IRC log

From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

(14:56:59) ja_: Moin
(14:57:21) mdamboldt [] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:57:36) volkerme: MoinMoin
(14:57:52) rbircher [] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:58:18) rbircher: Hi at all
(14:58:19) ml1 [n=ml93712@nat/sun/x-723198f7a05c27c5] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:59:02) ml1: hi
(15:00:06) Stefan_b: Moin!
(15:00:07) _Nesshof_: moin
(15:00:22) mdamboldt: Tach
(15:00:35) _Nesshof_: 3.0 release status: not that well
(15:00:58) _Nesshof_: m6 will be avalable soon, but still some fixes are in work
(15:01:23) _rene_: so rc2 will be m7?
(15:01:32) _rene_: (or something later)
(15:02:22) _Nesshof_: _rene_: the first question is: what do we want to do with m6 ?
(15:02:43) ***_rene_ would vote for just re-opening it and include all known fixes and make that rc1
(15:02:49) _Nesshof_: at least some people wanted to have a look on the current status for verification
(15:02:57) _rene_: but I also can understand people who don't want that :)
(15:03:07) _rene_: s/rc1/rc2/
(15:03:33) _Nesshof_: _rene_: yes, that's right
(15:04:17) _Nesshof_: also providing all the install sets is some effort
(15:05:16) _Nesshof_: so I would think we can put out installation set to people who want to have it, but not doing this with full rc effort and announcement
(15:05:21) rbircher: A Question about the mac builds
(15:05:26) rtimm: from RE side it's no difference in effort, whether we do a m7 or stick with m6.
(15:05:49) _Nesshof_: rbircher: yes ?
(15:06:19) rbircher: Will SUN providing other Langage too for the RC
(15:06:32) mdamboldt: _nesshof_: If we put out a build m6 but not to announce it some people will complain that it's not transparent.
(15:06:55) blauwal [] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:07:10) MechtiIde: mdamboldt, we can announce it as a developer build not as a RC
(15:07:57) ja_: _Nesshof_: from my POV waiting for m7 is better
(15:07:57) _rene_: MechtiIde: but I guess _Nesshof_s point was that even this is work
(15:08:12) _rene_: MechtiIde: and he wanted to avoid that
(15:08:22) _rene_: (iiur)
(15:09:00) volkerme: _Nesshof_: The other way round: Who long we would have to wait for all fixes from to be integrated?
(15:09:39) _Nesshof_: volkerme: my estimation is that we will have all issues fixed and cws approved until Thursday
(15:09:53) _Nesshof_: so build will be done until Friday
(15:09:56) rtimm: I'd opt for putting out m6 as it is. We have it, so people can already test existing fixes. Don't loose time.
(15:10:07) _Nesshof_: so that it can't be announced before Monday
(15:10:14) MechtiIde: rtimm, +1
(15:11:01) blauwal: +1
(15:11:14) _Nesshof_: MechtiIde: and how to announce ?
(15:11:45) _Nesshof_: MechtiIde: as rc2 ?
(15:11:46) MechtiIde: as a developer snapshot m6
(15:11:54) MechtiIde: it must not RC1
(15:12:08) _Nesshof_: MechtiIde: isn't that even more confusing for the people out there ?
(15:12:09) ja_: rtimm: providing m6 as Developer Snapshot would require an OOo-Dev installation set. That is not available yet
(15:12:11) MechtiIde: I think we can announce the m7 as RC2 then
(15:12:25) MechtiIde: sorry I mean RC2
(15:13:52) rtimm: ja_: really? Why?
(15:14:27) rbircher: MechtiIde, I think, that's not a god idea
(15:14:39) calc: is there a date estimation for 3.0?
(15:14:53) mdamboldt: RC1++
(15:14:53) mdamboldt: or
(15:14:53) mdamboldt: RC1 rev2
(15:15:11) MechtiIde: mdamboldt, this would be an alternative
(15:15:19) volkerme: MechtiIde: We can not announce a RC, when we know there are additional issues
(15:16:28) _Nesshof_: mdamboldt: what does that mean for the filenames, will bouncer handle this ?
(15:16:31) rbircher: RC1 rev2 is a good alternativ
(15:16:33) MechtiIde: volkerme, that's why I want a "developer snapshot"
(15:17:01) volkerme: MechtiIde: I agree, but see the comment of ja_
(15:17:02) mdamboldt: _nesshof_: I guess at least "RC1_rev2" would work
(15:17:23) _rene_: uhm, why rc1_rev2? did I miss osmething?
(15:17:33) ***_rene_ doesn't see the sense in that at all
(15:18:09) _rene_: there were earlier releases where we have milestones between rcs
(15:18:38) volkerme: _rene_: But they did not install as OOo-Dev
(15:18:38) _rene_: and you can avoid the whole mess - if you really want - by just making m6 rc2 (when all fixes are there)
(15:18:40) Fridrich: we can go with rc untill hundred if we want, why not to call it just rc2 and the next one rc3....
(15:18:52) _rene_: Fridrich: because that sounds bad :)
(15:19:00) _rene_: s/sounds/looks/
(15:19:07) volkerme: Fridrich: Ask a marketing guy
(15:19:51) Fridrich: yeah, but some fishy rc1_plus_some_fixes_but_not_all is too much of a hassle and really we don't need to market rcs? do we?
(15:20:13) calc: for 2.4 were rc's just released fast enough that new bugs didn't show up until later? ;-)
(15:20:13) volkerme: ja_: You did not answer the question why m6 cam not be build as OOo-Dev
(15:20:24) calc: iirc it had 6 or so rc's
(15:20:35) volkerme: s/cam/can
(15:21:10) ja_: volkerme: OOoDev installation sets haven't been packed by Sun RE#
(15:21:33) _Nesshof_: calc: estimated final release now would then be September 29th
(15:21:50) volkerme: ja_: So your are ready for upload with m6?
(15:21:58) _Nesshof_: ja_: maybe you can ask RE to do so ?
(15:22:01) rtimm: We of course could also do dev install sets. But does it make sense?
(15:22:47) calc: _Nesshof_: ok
(15:22:52) mdamboldt: rtimm: From my point of view no.
(15:22:58) rtimm: We recently saw issues (installation related) present in dev builds but not in release ones. So, shouldn't we concentrate testing on 'real' builds at this state?
(15:23:27) _rene_: yep
(15:24:00) Stefan_b: The idea of m6 was to verify integrated fixes. Those involved in doing so should be a ble to to do it with a non-OOO-Dev but OOo installation as well.
(15:24:10) Stefan_b: rtimm: +1
(15:24:33) Fridrich: rtimm: +1 from me for this one
(15:25:22) blauwal: rtimm: +1
(15:25:46) volkerme: rtimm: +1 because of installation and integration issues
(15:25:47) _rene_: it does not make sense to release stuff for testing which will have differences on what will be rc2 (from the build POV at least), so: +1 (as I alread ysaid with the "yep")
(15:25:54) rbircher: +1 From me
(15:26:04) _Nesshof_: all agree on this ?
(15:26:11) ja_: in this case calling it RC2 would make sense (even if we know that there'll be another RC)
(15:26:13) of_sun: +1 from me too
(15:26:23) _rene_: ja_: no, it doesn't.
(15:26:33) _rene_: ja_: because it can't be a release candiate.
(15:26:47) blauwal: I agree with Rene here
(15:26:56) _rene_: ja_: release candidates are "ok, we think this is ok and it's a candidate for release"
(15:27:04) ja_: how should I rename the files ?
(15:27:05) _rene_: ja_: this one is KNOWN to be not one
(15:27:14) Stefan_b: What about a naming contest? What's the price? MY idea: "RC2_of_at_least_3RCs"
(15:28:15) ml1: what about "pre_RC2"
(15:28:37) _rene_: yawns. why so much fuss?
(15:28:49) _rene_: just call it m6. it is neither rc1 nor rc2
(15:29:24) _rene_: people who want to test developer milestones know (well, should know) what m6 is and that rc1 == m5
(15:29:41) _Nesshof_: if there is no decision within 5 minutes I will make one :-)
(15:29:49) _rene_: and people who -- without any sign of it -- think that rc2 == m6, well...
(15:30:06) rbircher: _rene_, If you answare at all the people who think, its a OOO-DEV Buiod
(15:30:15) rtimm: _Nesshof_: please do so
(15:30:29) mdamboldt: _nesshof_: +1
(15:30:33) Stefan_b: _rene_: +1. By releasing and announcing an RC, some people might "pull the trigger" for certain release (test) automatisms. THOSE shalll not run completely. But havong a look at a real-life-m6 does make sense.
(15:30:47) _rene_: rbircher: I won't. they should use their brain.
(15:31:23) ja_: how about this ? I'll rename them to OOo_OOO300_m6* , upload them to extended only and will make no Bouncer entries
(15:31:49) Stefan_b: _rene_: brain use? And what is software for? :-)
(15:32:15) _Nesshof_: Stefan_b: _rene_ calm down ;-)
(15:32:21) volkerme: ja_: Are all languages possible on extended?
(15:32:48) Stefan_b: _Nesshof_: sorry.
(15:33:18) ja_: volkerme: comparable to what has been uploaded with RC1
(15:33:39) rbircher: Yes, and are languages für Mac SUN Build also aviable
(15:34:30) MechtiIde: rbircher, comparable To RC1
(15:34:37) mdamboldt: _nesshof_: 5 minutes are over
(15:34:57) volkerme: _Nesshof_: so take the point of ja_ ;-)
(15:35:10) _Nesshof_: ok, we will not release m6 with a public announcement
(15:35:56) _Nesshof_: for those who knows about what m6 is intented to be, can download the main bit from a private location
(15:36:35) _rene_: but -- if possible -- please do source tarballs as usual
(15:36:40) _Nesshof_: we will look for a location where to upload the most wanted install set, so that the qa folks know where to download and qa them if they like
(15:36:43) _rene_: so we can test the new -extensions split :-)
(15:36:51) _Nesshof_: _rene_: yes, that should work
(15:37:23) _Nesshof_: any objection ? if not, ja_ or mdamboldt will anounce on this channel where to download
(15:39:16) _Nesshof_: ok, do we need to approve any open nominated stoppers ?
(15:39:20) paveljanik [n=Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:39:29) _Nesshof_: I think all of them have approved
(15:39:31) paveljanik: Hi
(15:39:35) _Nesshof_: paveljanik: moin
(15:42:28) _Nesshof_: looks that we have covered all topic for today ?
(15:43:18) _Nesshof_: RE duties ?
(15:43:21) rtimm: RE on OOO300 this week (m6 + m7) will be done by me (rt)
(15:43:42) rtimm: Heiner and Vladimir will do DEV300 m32
(15:44:05) _Nesshof_: rtimm: m32 will be without any integrations ?
(15:44:30) rtimm: _Nesshof_: Yes. Just some adaptions for svn.
(15:44:38) _Nesshof_: ok, fine
(15:44:40) mod_ [] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:45:01) _Nesshof_: ok, closing meeting for today
(15:45:02) _Nesshof_: by
(15:45:08) mdamboldt: bye
(15:45:11) Stefan_b: Bye!
(15:45:12) of_sun: bye
(15:45:13) mod_ hat den Raum verlassen
(15:45:13) volkerme: bye
(15:45:14) ml1: bye
(15:45:43) calc: bye
(15:45:56) ml1 hat den Raum verlassen
(15:53:44) paveljanik: bye

Personal tools