ReleaseStatus Minutes 2009-01-05 IRC log
(14:58:10) ja_: Happy new year!
(14:58:49) _rene_: my year began not so happy when reading IZ mails today, but yes, hny :)
(14:59:35) sophi: Happy New Year all :)
(15:00:09) mdamboldt: Hello and a happy new year!
(15:00:41) mdamboldt: First topic for today: OOo 3.0.1 Release
(15:00:51) mdamboldt: The OOO300m14 has been published as Release Candidate 1 on 23rd Dec 2008.
(15:01:10) mdamboldt: Some (possible) stoppers have already been raised:
(15:01:10) mdamboldt: Issue 97710 Status: fix in progress
(15:01:10) mdamboldt: Issue 97491 Status: fix in progress
(15:01:14) HeRoSun [n=chatzill@nat/sun/x-edf8576c91f7cf43] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:01:16) IZBot: framework DEFECT NEW P3 first value in list boxes not visible if current value is not the first item http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=97710
(15:01:18) IZBot: framework DEFECT STARTED P2 "soffice" now being binary instead of shellscript http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=97491
(15:01:32) mdamboldt: Nothing to discuss about for these two issues, I think!?
(15:01:39) kai_a [n=Kai_Ahre@i577AA9A4.versanet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:01:52) mdamboldt: So let's look at the more complicate ones:
(15:01:52) UweL: not from QA side
(15:01:52) mdamboldt: Issue 97139 Status: can't fix in 3.0.1
(15:01:58) IZBot: framework DEFECT NEW P3 Text document is always read-only from a mounted FAT partition http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=97139
(15:02:09) _rene_: what?
(15:02:16) ericb2: lol
(15:02:22) _rene_: so anyone who has a FAT partition can't open docs r-w?
(15:02:31) _rene_: no way, this *has* to be fixed
(15:02:43) UweL: not your decision
(15:02:57) _rene_: UweL: yeah, and let's break all users. right.
(15:02:58) mdamboldt: _rene_ and ericb2: Did you follow the comments in 97139 already?
(15:03:11) _rene_: mdamboldt: no, and tbh I don't care
(15:03:19) ericb2: mdamboldt: willread them carefully :-)
(15:03:24) mav: _rene_: Could you please read the description, the problem is reproducible only when FAT partition is used per NFS
(15:03:37) _rene_: ah
(15:03:49) _rene_: then fix the issue description :)
(15:04:03) _rene_: "a mounted FAT partition"
(15:04:18) mav: The issue description contains this information.
(15:04:25) _rene_: partitions are always mounted.
(15:04:37) mav: Please read the whole description
(15:05:02) _rene_: UweL: if it's nfs, I still disagree, but not that hard
(15:05:16) _rene_: UweL: but from the summary that was not clear *at all*
(15:05:31) mdamboldt: Anything else on 97139?
(15:05:43) _rene_: UweL: every partition is "mounted". and FAT is common as data exchange medium.
(15:05:52) MechtiIde: but all people with an mixed OS environment will habe problems with 3.0.1
(15:05:58) _rene_: yep
(15:06:05) skotti_: No, that is not correct
(15:06:19) MechtiIde: especially in small business environments
(15:06:26) HeRoSun: _rene_: The NFS client fails on creating files correctly with O_CREAT and O_EXCL. This is a bug in the NFS client
(15:06:31) MechtiIde: There I found this problem
(15:06:53) skotti_: I've done some testing in this area and succeeded only once to reproduce the problem
(15:07:01) _rene_: HeRoSun: as said, I just judged from the summary
(15:07:09) _rene_: HeRoSun: and that one is too generic
(15:07:18) _rene_: HeRoSun: doesn't talk about nfs
(15:07:47) rtimm: No doubt that issue is ugly and needs to be fixed. But is it a stopper for 3.0.1? From my POV probably not.
(15:08:05) ***_rene_ just fixed the summary
(15:08:08) MechtiIde: because there is no workaround
(15:08:22) _rene_: rtimm: if it was for all FATs, yes. that was my point.
(15:08:22) UweL: there willbe a solution in 3.1
(15:08:36) _rene_: rtimm: nfs-mounted FAT, well....
(15:08:42) MechtiIde: via samba mount you have problems to create new files
(15:09:12) _rene_: I don't look on the browser usually while IRCing
(15:09:18) _rene_: I'd need to start X
(15:09:18) MechtiIde: so what is the possibility in a mixed OS environment
(15:10:24) rtimm: _rene_: that's why MechtiIde sent a list of 4 issues to discuss about here some hours ago. Just that everyone could be prepared.
(15:10:25) HeRoSun: Mechtilde: Use a distribution with a bug free NFS client
(15:10:37) _rene_: UweL: yes, but as said, the issue sounded like it affected all FAT
(15:10:43) _rene_: UweL: not just nfs-mounted FAT
(15:10:53) _rene_: rtimm: I'd then still need to start X :)
(15:10:57) MechtiIde: HeRoSun, which one is free of this bug?
(15:11:57) _rene_: UweL: so yes, with BIG headache, ok for 3.1
(15:12:09) _rene_: UweL: but next time please have better summaries....
(15:12:26) rafaella [n=Rafaella@nat/sun/x-cfaf41a2069760f6] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:12:28) UweL: next time please read all
(15:12:54) _rene_: UweL: I read the summary. I don't start X to launch a browser extra, sorry
(15:13:10) mdamboldt: So we agree to fix 97139 in 3.1
(15:13:11) _rene_: I am ircing on plain console currently
(15:13:24) _rene_: no X running right now :)
(15:13:50) ***MechtiIde can't agree
(15:14:28) _rene_: UweL: don't forget Linux/unix users, please, who don't have a graphical interface all the time
(15:14:48) _rene_: UweL: (and this box yet doesn't have gpm installed, so no cut'n'paste on console either)
(15:16:26) mdamboldt: We have two options I can see:
(15:16:26) mdamboldt: a) Fix 97139 in 3.1 by a workaround while implementing changes regarding file locking
(15:16:26) mdamboldt: b) Fix 97139 in 3.0.1 by changing file locking right now just before the release again and putting it on high risk
(15:16:26) mdamboldt: Btw. The issue was always there and as hro and mav explained it's root cause is in NFS. Due to changes in file locking the bug now shows up on the surface.
(15:17:20) _rene_: mdamboldt: as said, I am with big headaches ok with 3.1
(15:17:21) mdamboldt: I clearly prefer a) in this case. Not that I feel lucky about the choice...
(15:17:27) ja_: +1 to fix 97139 (a) in 3.1
(15:17:30) of_sun: a) +1
(15:17:35) UweL: +1
(15:17:44) _rene_: mdamboldt: what I do not like is buggy sumarries or people who expect people to have X or browser byhand :)
(15:17:51) _rene_: mdamboldt: so, yes +1 for a)
(15:18:08) mdamboldt: Next one on the lists:
(15:18:09) mdamboldt: Issue 89713
(15:18:15) IZBot: Drawing DEFECT NEW P3 gengal is broken failing to init UCB http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=89713
(15:18:21) _rene_: regression since 2.4.x
(15:18:24) _rene_: found in 3.0 beta
(15:18:32) _rene_: left there for months
(15:18:52) _rene_: if anyone of you cared, it even was a blocker for 3.0.0 :)
(15:19:03) _rene_: now it's for 3.0.1 ;-)
(15:19:19) _rene_: that tool *is* used *externally*
(15:19:44) _rene_: and anyone who maintains a openclipart package generating OOo gallery files now has to use go-oo to do that...
(15:21:50) _rene_: (now = since 3.0 beta)
(15:22:20) mdamboldt: To me it does not sond that this is really a stopper for 3.0.1.
(15:22:30) MechtiIde: and distri can't do a vanilla build
(15:22:43) _rene_: mdamboldt: ah, yes, and what should distros do?
(15:22:51) _rene_: mdamboldt: not package openclipart at all?
(15:23:00) _rene_: mdamboldt: not integrate it with OOo?
(15:23:18) mdamboldt: _rene_: In a mail thread with Stephan Bergmann you mentioned that people already workaround this today.
(15:23:18) _rene_: mdamboldt: if they want to integrate it with OOo they need to create the gallery files using gengal
(15:23:29) _rene_: mdamboldt: which they can't
(15:23:36) _rene_: mdamboldt: by using go-oo, yes
(15:23:47) mdamboldt: Mechtilde: If you add Gallery items in your build it's not vanilla anymore anyway!??!
(15:23:47) _rene_: mdamboldt: but distros might want to use vanilla
(15:24:11) _rene_: mdamboldt: read again
(15:24:18) _rene_: vanilla openoffice.org build
(15:24:38) _rene_: *external* openclopart package creating the files and put it into OOos dir
(15:25:03) _rene_: that has nothing to do with the OOo build *except* that people can't use vanilla OOo to generate those files
(15:25:09) _rene_: they have to use go-oo
(15:25:44) mdamboldt: To me it's not even clear who will do the fix and how it would look like. So I don't have an idea about the impact.
(15:25:45) _rene_: and that's broken for people who use vanilla OOo (or are going to use it (again)) and need gengal to create those files
(15:26:05) _rene_: mdamboldt: there's a patch. and nothing inside the OOo build uses gengal.
(15:26:37) _rene_: mdamboldt: it's a tool for external people who need to create galleries.
(15:26:57) _rene_: mdamboldt: if you don't fix that, distros never would be able to switch to vanilla OOo completely
(15:27:04) _rene_: mdamboldt: at least those who package openclipart
(15:27:19) _rene_: mdamboldt: and given that it works in 2.4.1
(15:27:32) _rene_: mdamboldt: it's a regression. caused by the 3-layer-OOo in 3.0.0
(15:27:43) _rene_: mdamboldt: that hits many "blocker" criteria
(15:28:40) MechtiIde: _rene_, FACK
(15:29:04) mdamboldt: _rene_: So please continue to work on this with Stephan Bergmann since Kay Ramme is not reachable. As far as I know the existing patch does not work.
(15:29:43) MechtiIde: mdamboldt, is it possible to get a CWS build from Sun build environment?
(15:29:48) _rene_: mdamboldt: the patch does work in go-oo. it's not my job to debug this, sb broke it, sb has to fix it, and it has been ignored for too long
(15:29:58) _rene_: mdamboldt: but yes, I can create a build any try myself.
(15:30:23) _rene_: mdamboldt: but not soon. currently deep into packaging 3.1 *vanilla*
(15:30:33) _rene_: mdamboldt: where I found this, and which is why I am so after it
(15:31:00) _rene_: mdamboldt: it's a blocker in any case.
(15:31:09) _rene_: mdamboldt: that's what you argue against, though
(15:31:29) mdamboldt: According to sb this is no trivial fix which he can do in two lines and bring it right now into 3.0.1.
(15:31:52) _rene_: then it's a more complicated fix. so what? still a blocker.
(15:32:09) _rene_: it was even in 3.0.0 times if someone cared and/or noticed
(15:32:43) _rene_: as I wrote in the issue, I just use go-oo currently anyway and in the timeframe before the fix I just didn't rebuild openclipart
(15:33:00) _rene_: when I did, I had the fix already, too, so I didn't notice either
(15:33:07) MechtiIde: do we want to release a 3.0,1 which is unusable for many people?
(15:33:10) blauwal [email@example.com] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:33:11) _rene_: I just notice it when packaging 3.1 *canilla*
(15:33:17) ja_: _rene_: I can understand your points regarding this tool but it would have been easier to know the patch is working as expected.
(15:33:33) _rene_: ja_: it is in go-oo. I just patch -p0'ed it.
(15:33:40) _rene_: ja_: there's no other gengal patch in there.
(15:33:54) _rene_: ja_: so I do not see at all why it should not work on vanilla, really.
(15:34:01) MechtiIde: ja_, therefore I ask for an CWS build on a Sun build maschine
(15:34:11) _rene_: ja_: but it's not my job to debug this either. I didn't break the tool...
(15:34:40) MechtiIde: there are some problems to build it on a buildbot
(15:35:34) mdamboldt: _rene_: As I said before, you should continue to discuss technical details with Stephan Bergmann. I don't think we can solve this issue right now, right here.
(15:35:34) mdamboldt: I'm not saying that this issue is no stopper.
(15:35:38) _rene_: ja_: and as it works for me currently in go-oo....
(15:35:52) _rene_: (which I am using right now and will also for 3.0.1)....
(15:36:13) _rene_: For 3.1 I'll create openoffice.org-* and go-oo-* (at least that's the plan)
(15:36:27) _rene_: mdamboldt: problem: I don't have resources right now to even build it
(15:36:44) _rene_: mdamboldt: and in two days I am back at work (nothing OOo-related)
(15:37:17) mba [n=chatzill@nat/sun/x-1f7a69efb2317032] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:37:59) _rene_: my build machines are busy for building 3.1 in two variants (openoffice.org-*, go-oo*)
(15:38:16) _rene_: they don't even have installsets yet...
(15:38:59) UweL: so how should the solution look like without shifting 3.0.1?
(15:39:07) _rene_: mdamboldt: wrong
(15:39:21) _rene_: mdamboldt: 15:22 < mdamboldt> To me it does not sond that this is really a stopper for 3.0.1.
(15:39:56) mdamboldt: _rene_: Didn't know that is forbidden to change opinions here :)
(15:40:44) _rene_: mdamboldt: you didn't say you changed it. so I was still arguing about that statement
(15:40:50) rtimm: so, how to proceed, any suggestions?
(15:41:58) MechtiIde: for understanding: Is it a general problem or only a problem of the buildbots not building the CWS fixgengal?
(15:44:27) skotti_ hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "Ex-Chat").
(15:45:05) _rene_: MechtiIde: well, the problem is that it's said that the fix wouldn'
(15:45:07) _rene_: MechtiIde: well, the problem is that it's said that the fix wouldn't work
(15:45:16) _rene_: MechtiIde: which might be
(15:45:42) _rene_: MechtiIde: I just know it works in go-oo and there's no extra gengal patches there.
(15:45:43) ja_: From my understanding someone (eg. René) might discuss with Stefan Bergmann how to include the patch provided and at the same time to ensure possible side effects do not appear.
(15:46:29) mdamboldt: _rene_: Do you have time to continue working on this with Stephan Bergmann?
(15:46:44) MechtiIde: so does it help to have a build from Sun build maschines?
(15:46:46) _rene_: only via issue and mail, yes, no time/resources for doing a build, no
(15:47:05) _rene_: but I can try if my 3.1 vanilla build has packages
(15:47:16) _rene_: whenever that will be (needs some restructuring)
(15:47:42) mdamboldt: Mechtilde: As far as I understood Stephan, the patch is not working. So I guess he can't create a build right now.
(15:47:59) _rene_: I'll ping jcn
(15:48:45) _rene_: 15:38 < UweL> so how should the solution look like without shifting 3.0.1?
(15:49:02) _rene_: UweL: isn't it better to ship quality that just looking at the time?
(15:49:15) _rene_: btw:
(15:49:16) _rene_: 15:47 <@_rene_> janneke: ping?
(15:49:16) _rene_: 15:47 <@janneke> _rene_: pong
(15:49:16) _rene_: 15:48 <@_rene_> janneke: any idea why your gengal-* fixes don't work on vanilla?
(15:49:19) _rene_: 15:48 <@janneke> _rene_: no, i'm building the CWS right now
(15:51:58) UweL: 15:38 < UweL> so how should the solution look like without shifting 3.0.1?
(15:52:51) _rene_: UweL: which what you imply that you don't want to shift 3.0.1 for this fix.
(15:53:16) _rene_: UweL: and that's what I disagree with.
(15:53:50) _rene_: if I noticed that in 3.0.0 already I'd have argued the same way for a 3.0.0 blocker :)
(15:54:07) _rene_: btw again:
(15:54:08) _rene_: 15:52 <@_rene_> janneke: seen sbs newest comment?
(15:54:08) _rene_: 15:53 <@janneke> _rene_: just read it; so it indeed has to do with the unbelievably-addingcomplexity we may need
(15:54:11) _rene_: 15:53 * janneke oops
(15:54:25) _rene_: 15:54 <@janneke> _rene_: just read it; so it indeed has to do with 3layer setup/install weirdness
(15:56:17) _rene_: 15:54 <@_rene_> janneke: can you fix it? or is sb right that it cannot be sanely fixed?
(15:56:59) _rene_: I'll continue this discussion and paste results/log here and/or to the issue (if jcn doesn't comment himself)
(15:57:28) mdamboldt: So we can go to next topic?
(15:57:40) _rene_: 15:56 <@janneke> _rene_: i was only commenting on his workaround. i don't really (want to) understand the 3layer thing...
(15:57:43) _rene_: 15:57 <@janneke> _rene_: but his assertion that it "cannot be sanely fixed" seems weird. it works for ooo-build, anything can be fixed?
(15:57:58) _rene_: 15:57 <@_rene_> janneke: so what does that mean for vanilla gengal?
(15:57:59) _rene_: 15:57 <@janneke> _rene_: i think/hope that tweaking the gengalrc file will do it.
(15:58:14) ja_: In this case I would not vote to include it into 3.0.1. On the other hand if we have a working solution then it should be possible to include the fix even for 3.0.1 but as I wouldn't like to shift 3.0.1 I vote to prepare a fix for 3.1.0.
(15:58:15) ja_: For now, if you do need to call gengal, a workaround is to call it with -env:URE_BOOTSTRAP=file:///opt/openoffice.org3/program/fundamentalrc
(15:58:38) _rene_: ja_: but only if you apply the patch first, no?
(15:58:55) _rene_: ja_: without that patch it won't work at all, will it? :)
(15:59:11) mba: _rene_: this was the last comment from sb in the issue
(16:00:26) mba: According to him the workaround works with the unpatched gengal
(16:01:09) mdamboldt: So again it's not looking like a stopper to me with this new informations....
(16:01:34) _rene_: ok, *if* that's the case (I can only verify this when I have a vanilla build) I agree to take this for 3.1.
(16:01:44) _rene_: big if.
(16:01:50) mba: sb's workaround needs to be verified, of cause.
(16:02:13) mdamboldt: So can we go to next topic now and clarify remaining stuff offline for 89713?
(16:02:16) mba: s/cause/course :-)
(16:02:52) mdamboldt: Also listed on the Wiki are:
(16:02:52) mdamboldt: Issue 23658
(16:02:52) mdamboldt: Issue 86791
(16:03:02) IZBot: Spreadsheet PATCH RESOLVED FIXED P4 Need ability to change datapilot source range http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=23658
(16:03:06) IZBot: Spreadsheet DEFECT NEW P3 Problem with draging fields in datapilot after changing sourcerange http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=86791
(16:03:10) _rene_: mdamboldt: well, offline would get me/jcn out, we're not in HH, and IZ is web, so online ;-))
(16:03:26) MechtiIde: these are problems for 3.1
(16:03:33) sophi: we have a l10n blocker introduced by issue 90144 and reported in issue 97741: new strings in UI that are not translated
(16:03:40) mdamboldt: Mechtilde: right, overlocked this while copy/paste
(16:03:40) IZBot: l10n DEFECT NEW P3 [l10n] Spelling and Grammar... not translated on contextual menu http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=97741
(16:03:46) MechtiIde: we have 97741 for 3.0.1
(16:04:02) _rene_: sophi: and what's blocker-worthy on one menu entry not translated?
(16:04:03) mdamboldt: So lets talk about 97741
(16:04:43) _rene_: mdamboldt: so if you do this offline, it'll take me and jcn out of the game -> bad
(16:04:57) sophi: _rene_: UI strings not translated have always been l10n build blockers
(16:05:04) _rene_: mdamboldt: (mail is also online, you need to be online to send it)
(16:05:11) mdamboldt: _rene_: offline from this chat, online in other mail / issue
(16:05:21) _rene_: sophi: l10n build blockers, but release blockers?
(16:05:30) sophi: rafaella: do you have a decision about this issue?
(16:05:33) _rene_: sophi: and why do we then have many languages where only parts is translated?
(16:06:01) oliverc: Both issues for datapilot (23658 and 86791) are handled by cws datapilotrange. Kohei has volunteered to take ownership on this cws and will make it ready for OOo3.2
(16:06:14) rafaella: sophi:3.0.1 was considered to be non translation rlevenat. There has not even be an l10n deadlines for fixes...
(16:06:31) _rene_: oliverc: 3.2?! after it lies months at nn without action?
(16:06:50) sophi: rafaella: yes I know, but we can't release a version with strings in English, it won't pass the QA
(16:07:27) _rene_: sophi: which QA? yours (fr)? or Suns?
(16:07:27) MechtiIde: it is relevant for all languages which are regularly 100 % translated
(16:07:49) sophi: _rene_: l10n QA, the version will stay in rc otherwise
(16:08:00) MechtiIde: all languages which are regularly 100 % translated
(16:08:03) mba: We had some string additions in OOo 3.0.1 that should not become visible at all - except if a particular extension is installed. It seems that one string was added though it is visible all the time. This clearly was a mistake.
(16:08:10) _rene_: sophi: so be it. (and if you need it, add the string). I don't see any missing translation as a blocker if it just affects one minor meu option even hidden in a context menu ;-)
(16:08:24) _rene_: sophi: for important dialogs or menus it might be different :)
(16:08:26) rafaella: sophi, I understand, but not sure the impact it would have to have the strings fixed.
(16:08:39) sophi: _rene_: please follow our l10n process
(16:08:42) mba: So what should be the fix: translating the string or removing it (as 3.0.1 shouldn't have new translations)?
(16:09:14) sophi: mba: if it can be hidden, then it's ok
(16:09:34) _rene_: but waht would be caused by hiding it?
(16:09:42) _rene_: there's a reason it appears now, isn't there?
(16:09:52) rafaella: sophi, I agree that if it can be hidden for all languges other than English it would be ok.
(16:10:09) mba: There is no reason for the change without having a Grammar Checker installed.
(16:10:10) sophi: rafaella: German is ok also
(16:10:18) _rene_: rafaella: and break the functionality for any language besides english?
(16:10:32) _rene_: mba: aha. and why can't people install a grammar checker in 3.0.1?
(16:10:42) _rene_: mba: at that time they need the menu, don't they?
(16:10:46) _rene_: mba: also in !en-US
(16:10:47) mba: As I said, it was a mistake.
(16:10:53) sophi: _rene_: currently language tool is not working in 3.0.1
(16:11:03) _rene_: sophi: that will be fixed. then it works in 3.0.1
(16:11:13) _rene_: sophi: then you need that option, don't you?
(16:11:30) sophi: _rene_: no, to poor tool for French ;)
(16:11:48) _rene_: sophi: ah, you only care about french.
(16:12:02) _rene_: sophi: /me does care about every language out there, not just german :)
(16:12:04) rafaella: mba, is it possible or not to just hidden the menu entry?
(16:12:06) sophi: mba: I understand the mistake and no problem if we can have no strings in English in the UI
(16:12:14) mba: _rene_: yes, the change would be needed in case a Grammar Checker is installed. Unfortunately we didn't finish GrammarChecking Framework in 3.0 and needed some fixed in 3.0.1.
(16:12:21) _rene_: sophi: don't judge from current stuff of external stuff to future stuff of external stuff. languagetool at one time will be fixed for 3.0.1
(16:12:23) sophi: _rene_: that was a joke, I won't be there else..
(16:12:41) _rene_: sophi: at that time that menu entry is needed, isn't it?
(16:13:04) _rene_: mba: .. which needed the addition of the new string.
(16:13:09) sophi: _rene_: and would be useless if one doesn't understand what it does
(16:13:23) _rene_: sophi: so what?
(16:13:33) _rene_: sophi: what's the english text?
(16:13:50) _rene_: I believe people will understand that...
(16:13:52) sophi: _rene_: spellcheck and grammar
(16:14:02) _rene_: see? easy to understand.
(16:14:17) _rene_: I don't object against it being translated
(16:14:32) _rene_: I object against it being not translated moving 3.0.1 behind
(16:14:37) MechtiIde: _rene_, but not for French people
(16:14:46) _rene_: *if* we get all translation to the next build, ok, but...
(16:14:54) MechtiIde: so I understand sophi's problem
(16:15:01) _rene_: MechtiIde: the french don't learn english at school? :)
(16:15:07) _rene_: (would not surprise me, but...)
(16:15:31) MechtiIde: this is here OT
(16:15:36) mba: For me it's not a problem if we change the string back to "Spellcheck" instead of "Spelling and Grammar". Even with a GC installed, people should be able to understand.
(16:15:47) _rene_: mba: no, that would be a bug
(16:15:52) _rene_: grammer is not Spellcheck
(16:15:55) _rene_: grammar
(16:16:08) sophi: _rene_: West African do not and speak French at second and national language, OOo is also for them
(16:16:22) _rene_: people won't find a grammar checker when it's hidden under "spellcheck"
(16:17:12) rafaella: _rene_: I guess that for Chinese or other Asian people it doesn't make much difference....
(16:17:37) mba: BTW: we have this string translated already: in the toolbar button. Perhaps we can "borrow" it from there.
(16:17:46) _rene_: rafaella: I disagree, Chinese and Thai or whatever also has grammar
(16:18:05) sophi: mba: how many time would we have to provide a translation?
(16:18:07) rafaella: _rene_ but not necessarily a spellchecker....
(16:18:45) _rene_: rafaella: of course they have correct spelling and wrong spelling
(16:18:56) rtimm: _rene_: I guess people who have learned english at school will be clever enough to find a grammar checker under spellcheck. mba: +1
(16:19:14) _rene_: rafaella: whether there's right now spellchecking stuff or grammar checkers is not relevant for this discussion
(16:19:42) _rene_: rtimm: no, they won't.
(16:19:48) rafaella: Proposal: take Spellcheck and all it localizations for 3.0.1 and translate it correctly as Spelling and Grammar in 3.1
(16:19:48) _rene_: rtimm: they know what spellcheck is.
(16:19:51) mba: sophi: if we could borrow the translation from the toolbar: perhaps a few hours work.
(16:20:04) _rene_: rafaella: they won't merge "grammar" into it
(16:20:14) _rene_: uh
(16:20:19) _rene_: rtimm: they won't merge "grammar" into it
(16:20:46) _rene_: rtimm: at least me would not. spellcheck is spellcheck. I wouldn't search grammar under it.
(16:21:02) mba: sophi: can you verify that the quick help text from the "spellcheck" toolbar button is translated correctly? I only have German and English versions here.
(16:21:37) mba: rafaella: do we have time left to provide new strings for 3.1?
(16:21:44) rtimm: rafaella: +1
(16:22:06) sophi: mba: yes, it's ok
(16:22:08) _rene_: -1, +1 for mbas proposal
(16:22:11) mdamboldt: mba: Frank Mau would be able to "borrow" the toolbar string. But he would not be able to put this into database for all "external" languages, too. Probably rafaella knows how to do so!?
(16:22:36) ja_: +1 to mba's proposal to take the translation from the toolbar button if it's as easy as mba says
(16:22:56) mba: rtimm: Perhaps we can do that at runtime in the code. That would be the precondition for my proposal.
(16:23:06) rafaella: mba: we are waiting for the m39 and it will be ready nt before Thursday....
(16:23:45) _rene_: mba: why? just copy the translations over?
(16:24:02) mba: rafaella: So adding new strings to a CWS until thursday would allow to translate them in 3.1?
(16:24:03) _rene_: mba: why do you need runtime stuff for it if it's the same translation?
(16:24:53) rafaella: mba: I dont think that there is time to integrater any other CWS....
(16:25:54) mba: _rene_: as mdamboldt pointed out, the problem might be the tooling. Both strings, though equal, belong to different source files and so they must appear in different "localize.rdf" files. If we can get this done reliably, fine.
(16:26:10) _rene_: mba: just cut'n'paste them over?
(16:26:20) _rene_: mba: and change them in the db accordingly?
(16:26:25) ***_rene_ doesn't see a problem
(16:26:38) rtimm: If it is in 3.0.1 RC it should also be in current DEV300 builds, shouldn't it? So, what else must get integrated? (Sorry, I get confused ...)
(16:26:48) mba: _rene_: AFAIK manual editing of localize.rdf is not very well appreciated...
(16:27:27) mba: rtimm: did you integrate tl56 into dev300 already?
(16:27:53) rtimm: http://eis.services.openoffice.org/EIS2/cws.ShowCWS?Path=DEV300%2Ftl56_DEV300
(16:27:59) rtimm: It's in DEv300 m38
(16:28:32) _rene_: mba: might be, but you change the db in the same turn.
(16:28:35) mba: rtimm: Fine! :-)
(16:28:47) _rene_: mba: of you change the db, export. if it just hits those strings, fine, too.
(16:29:09) _rene_: mba: but you don't need runtime stuff, just copy'n'paste
(16:29:14) rafaella: Sorry, I need to go now. I will follow up later on
(16:29:17) rafaella hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "Leaving").
(16:30:05) mba: That's unfortunate, I just wanted to ask whether we can "copy" a translation in the database... :-(
(16:31:30) mdamboldt: mba: Accoring to rafaella we can copy and paste translations in the database for all languages. Frank Mau has an other oppinion about this. Think we (they) need to clarify...
(16:31:57) ja_: mba: please do so.
(16:32:26) mba: OK, for now we can just do the following: we will find out if copying the translation is possible. If not, we switch the string back to what we have in 3.0. This will have the side effect that people that install a GC once it is ready will have a slightly wrong string until 3.1 will be out.
(16:32:40) mdamboldt: +1
(16:32:46) ja_: +1
(16:32:51) rtimm: +1
(16:32:54) UweL: +1
(16:33:00) of_sun: +1
(16:33:28) sophi: +1 and thank you
(16:33:48) mdamboldt: Anything elese about 3.0.1 release?
(16:34:21) mdamboldt: Next topic OOo 3.1 Release:
(16:34:21) mdamboldt: Listed in the wiki:
(16:34:21) mdamboldt: Issue 23658
(16:34:21) mdamboldt: Issue 86791
(16:34:31) IZBot: Spreadsheet PATCH RESOLVED FIXED P4 Need ability to change datapilot source range http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=23658
(16:34:35) IZBot: Spreadsheet DEFECT NEW P3 Problem with draging fields in datapilot after changing sourcerange http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=86791
(16:36:00) _rene_: mba: -1 if the string removed grammar.
(16:36:11) _rene_: mba: +1 for the original proposal (copying over)
(16:36:46) UweL: the cws with 23658 introduced a regression => 86791
(16:36:47) _rene_: mba: I'd fix my versions' string if it gets changed back to just "Spellcheck"
(16:37:00) _rene_: UweL: and the cws owner didn't care.
(16:37:19) mba: _rene_: we will report soon if the copying works. This might render any further discussions useless.
(16:37:26) mdamboldt: Sounds not unusual when this corresponding CWS is being shifted to 3.2 release as already mentioned by oliverc.
(16:37:26) mdamboldt: Any further comments?
(16:37:39) _rene_: mdamboldt: yes.
(16:37:55) _rene_: mdamboldt: as said, it could have been long ready if the cws owner did his job. in this case: Sun :)
(16:38:06) _rene_: mdamboldt: so yes, I disagree with 3.2.
(16:38:26) UweL: train model => 3.2
(16:38:57) _rene_: UweL: yeah. right "we hold up the train ourselves so that it will get late"
(16:40:08) _rene_: UweL: that doesn't excuse the person who held it up, and neither is it a good thing that the train is now late
(16:40:15) _rene_: UweL: but the train should arrive asap :)
(16:40:38) UweL: seems to me I have a new friend :-)
(16:41:08) mba: We shouldn't discuss who did his job or not - fact is, we have a CWS that is not done yet and can't be integrated now. The question is if the the stuff that is implemented in this CWS is important enough so that it can be seen as a showstopper to 3.1 if the CWS is moved to 3.2.
(16:41:16) _rene_: UweL: I just don't like bogus arguments
(16:41:44) UweL: same for me
(16:41:46) _rene_: UweL: it's just that you (somehow) often come up with these
(16:42:02) mba: _rene_: Uwe's argument isn't bogus. It's just the short version of my comment. If something isn't important enough to stop a release, it can wait.
(16:42:19) mba: Now we have to find out, if that's the case here.
(16:43:00) mdamboldt: I don't know anything special/important about this feature, I would simply move it to 3.2.
(16:43:32) _rene_: I can live with 3.2, I just don't like how it's delayed by sun and then argumented that it's not ready
(16:44:01) _rene_: nn is cws owner, to remember. guess what would happen if kohei didn't volunteer to finish the cws up?
(16:44:08) _rene_: 3.2 -> 3.3 -> 3.4 -> ...
(16:44:21) _rene_: after it as already retargetted almost as much :)
(16:44:50) mdamboldt: Ok, lets proceed....
(16:44:50) mdamboldt: DEV300m39 is in progress and will become "the feature freeze" build to start translation process.
(16:44:57) _rene_: s/ready/ready - by the same people/
(16:45:03) mdamboldt: The CWS macmenusquit has not been integrated due to heavy menu changes which result in very expensive automated tests which were not possible intime.
(16:45:16) _rene_: mdamboldt: ah, and why didn't the nominated cwses not yet integrated? ;-)
(16:45:27) mdamboldt: Any comments on macmenusquit
(16:45:58) _rene_: mdamboldt: ah, nevermind, read it bogusly as "build started"
(16:46:58) ericb2: mdamboldt: can you explain me "heavy menus changes" ?
(16:47:41) ericb2: mdamboldt: in the cws, are removed 3 entries, not respecting the Aqua Human Interface Guidelines
(16:47:42) calc [n=ccheney@ubuntu/member/calc] hat den Raum betreten.
(16:48:05) mdamboldt: Hmm, may by UweL can!?
(16:48:26) UweL: we remove menu items so a lot of automated tests need to be adjusted
(16:48:26) ericb2: mdamboldt: this cws is ready since ages
(16:49:09) mdamboldt: UweL: And we didn't have enough ressources to take care in time due to other high priority tasks, too?
(16:49:11) ericb2: UweL: sorry, I don't understand. this is QA problme, not code problem ?
(16:49:27) mba: ericb2: strictly speaking it is not ready before the test cases have been adjusted. ;-)
(16:50:14) mdamboldt: UweL: So can we think about an exception here because you now have ressources again to do it asap now?
(16:50:30) UweL: yes to mdamboldt and ericb2 :-)
(16:50:41) mdamboldt: UweL: rough timeline?
(16:51:13) _rene_: in a few secs. the testcases have already been adapted given jsks comments. mac and windows works :)
(16:51:25) ericb2: UweL: the QA man is Joerg Skotkke ..
(16:51:25) _rene_: imho it's just a matter of changing the listbox :-)
(16:51:32) ericb2: thanks _rene_ :)
(16:52:05) mdamboldt: Ok, so everybody seems to be fine with getting macmenusquitmacmenusquit in after feature freeze.
(16:52:10) UweL: mdamboldt: Maybe end of this week
(16:52:21) _rene_: mdamboldt: no, before.
(16:52:24) ja_: +1
(16:52:31) _rene_: mdamboldt: there's enough time for m39
(16:52:48) _rene_: mdamboldt: m39 also contains other feature freeze cwses :)
(16:52:55) _rene_: s/contains/will contain/#
(16:53:04) _rene_: UweL: eh, why, please?
(16:53:14) _rene_: UweL: given jsks comments, everything works
(16:54:10) _rene_: UweL: doing whole lot of QA again? and eventually running into that Java-not-found problem (not related to cws) again, maybe?
(16:54:17) _rene_: UweL: further delaying it?
(16:54:58) mdamboldt: Ok, further items:
(16:54:58) mdamboldt: Reminder: Code freeze for 3.1 is January 29th 2009
(16:54:58) mdamboldt: RE duties this week?
(16:55:22) _rene_: NB: I don't care about Mac OS, don't use it as it's non-free anyway, but this cws is ready for 3.1. now.
(16:55:30) rtimm: dev300m39 is done by Heiner aka blauwal ak hr
(16:55:55) rtimm: Oliver (obo) will do next OOO300 milestone
(16:56:15) mdamboldt: Upload duties this week?
(16:56:38) ja_: either Marcus or myself
(16:57:10) ericb2: BTW, I got another question about a forgoten cws : was macleofix4x11 nominated for 2.4.2 but never integrated
(16:57:30) HeRoSun hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.3/2008092720]").
(16:57:30) ericb2: and it was very important to integrate it in the last X11 version
(16:57:33) rtimm: integrations for m39 are ongoing
(16:57:49) _rene_: ericb2: rumours say there will be a 2.4.3..
(16:57:53) rtimm: ah, sorry, forget that - 2.4.2 you wrote ...
(16:58:03) ericb2: rtimm: yes. Was nominated
(16:58:12) ericb2: rtimm: but .. forgoten ?
(16:58:32) ericb2: _rene_: noticed. I'll take care ;)
(16:59:41) rtimm: macleofix4x11 got nominated too late for 2.4.2
(17:00:19) rtimm: It will automatically(?) get into 2.4.3 whenever that will be
(17:00:22) ericb2: rtimm: the issue was a blocker
(17:00:41) ericb2: rtimm: just wondering what is the purpose of blockers then
(17:01:38) rtimm: we discussed that CWS, AFAIR. You said you could not get someone to QA it, didn't you?
(17:02:06) ericb2: rtimm: pl did the QA, in 5 minutes
(17:02:18) ericb2: rtimm: I exagerate : it was a mac only change
(17:02:46) ericb2: rtimm: but if in 2.4.3, that's ok for me
(17:02:57) rtimm: memory is fading out ... So I seem to confuse something
(17:03:34) mdamboldt: Anything else you want to raise today? (after about 120 minutes :-)
(17:03:53) ericb2: mdamboldt: I still am not sure to understand what happens with macmenusquit
(17:04:03) ericb2: mdamboldt: what is the decision ?
(17:04:20) ja_: CWS macmenusquit will be taken after feature freeze
(17:04:34) _rene_: why after?
(17:04:44) _rene_: again, it's ready.
(17:04:46) rtimm: ericb2: just found some log:
(17:04:48) rtimm: [17:02] <rtimm> ericb2: Hi! Any news on macleofix4x11?
(17:04:55) rtimm: [17:02] <ericb2> rtimm: no news :/
(17:04:56) mdamboldt: ericb2: Sounds it was nominated too late in point of view to the coresponding build started. I don't remember the CWS personally and the corresponding story as a blocker, but after all, yes, it would become part of a 2.4.3 when it's done.
(17:05:03) _rene_: read jsks comment.
(17:05:15) _rene_: mdamboldt: he asked abot menusquit, not the ole4x11 one
(17:05:23) rtimm: [...]
(17:05:25) rtimm: [17:03] <ericb2> rtimm: I'm sorry but I can't set the cws as RfQA until somebody confirms
(17:05:41) ericb2: rtimm: yes, this is infinite loop
(17:05:51) _rene_: mdamboldt: and that one isn't solved. there's no reason to further delay it
(17:05:52) mdamboldt: _rene_: Uups, seems that 120 minutes are too much for me........
(17:06:23) _rene_: mdamboldt: assuming jsks comment are correct, which I have no reason to doubt
(17:07:33) mdamboldt: We will integrate CWS menusquit as soon as it's ready. May be it's tomorrow or latest end of this week, depending if you follow UweL or jsk's comments ;-)
(17:07:57) _rene_: mdamboldt: it's ready *now* according to jsks comments
(17:08:50) _rene_: mdamboldt: no need to wait one more day or even to the end of the week to set it to AbQA or even nominated.
(17:09:17) _rene_: blauwal: btw, tke mozbootstrapfix for m39. important buildfix. I have no idea when mh comes back from VAC to nominate cwses again,...
(17:09:21) UweL: jsk sounded 90% sure as I talked to him. I like to get the remaining 10% tomorrow :-)
(17:09:52) _rene_: UweL: and why is that then not recoded. the cws comment say that everything works
(17:09:57) _rene_: recorded
(17:10:15) blauwal: _rene_: well I think mdamboldt and UweL can nominate it
(17:10:35) rtimm: _rene_: no need to hurry. If it's feature / ui freeze relevant, it's too late anyway. If not, it can get into next milestone as well
(17:10:39) blauwal: _rene_: if it's only a build fix I can do it
(17:11:05) _rene_: rtimm: wrong
(17:11:14) _rene_: rtimm: every milestone build is broken right now
(17:11:34) _rene_: rtimm: this could even have qualified as a masterfix, I just wanted QA
(17:12:05) mdamboldt: Guys, I've to leave for today.
(17:12:15) UweL: me too
(17:12:26) rtimm: wasn't there someone complaining for meaningfully desciptions and summaries?
(17:13:32) mdamboldt: bye
(17:13:44) mdamboldt heißt jetzt mdamboldt_away
(17:14:39) _rene_: rtimm: this is meaningful. (the issue)
(17:15:08) _rene_: rtimm: if you read the issue you'd have seen that it's a serious problem :)
(17:15:29) rtimm: _rene_: mozbootstrap shouldn't have been disabled (P3)
(17:15:51) _rene_: rtimm: I don't like unmeaningful cws descriptions/names either, but that's a lost fight.
(17:16:12) _rene_: abXY, sbXYZ, ...
(17:16:25) _rene_: rtimm: that says what the issue is about.
(17:16:43) UweL hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0/2008052906]").
(17:17:33) kai_a hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
(17:18:09) ja_: CWS mozbootstrapfix has been nominated
(17:18:24) kai_a [n=Kai_Ahre@nat/sun/x-5cabf6cc44292ac4] hat den Raum betreten.
(17:18:40) mdamboldt_away hat den Raum verlassen
(17:19:02) mav hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 18.104.22.168/2008071712]").
(17:19:45) _rene_: ja_: say thanks to mdamboldt
(17:20:53) ja_: If anything has been said for today then I'd like to leave as well ;)
(17:20:56) _rene_: oh, I've remembered something for 3.1
(17:21:06) _rene_: kai_a: reportbuilderext. still not ANY sign.
(17:21:37) _rene_: kai_a: when will this fix get over to dev300?
(17:21:53) _rene_: kai_a: was done *before* 3.0.0, even.
(17:22:30) kai_a: _rene_: please get in contact with Ocke Janssen, he needs to to the changes together with his other CWS tasks
(17:23:00) _rene_: he doesn't. he can just do it with svn and do a merge.
(17:23:09) _rene_: and he didn't even reply to your mail.
(17:23:29) _rene_: and I have a cws based on it. I need to resync to a master containing that and then find QA for that cws
(17:23:51) _rene_: otherwise configure is broken, but I am well aware that Sun might not care
(17:23:58) kai_a: _rene_: ok, I'll talk to him tomorrow.
(17:24:35) _rene_: .oO ( glad that tomorrow isn't holiday in HH)