ReleaseStatus Minutes 2009-09-21 IRC log

(14:54:38) Das Thema für #oooreleases ist: Release-Stauts-Meeting, every monday at 15:00 Hamburg Time (13:00 UTC in summer)
(14:54:56) ml2 [n=ml93712@192.18.8.1] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:54:58) ml2: hi
(14:57:02) ja_: Moin
(14:58:34) rtimm [n=Ruediger@192.18.8.1] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:58:36) VolkerMe: MoinMoin
(14:58:46) Thalion72: Hi
(14:59:04) kai_a [n=Kai_Ahre@nat/sun/x-cawbnunmbkzrjegx] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:00:03) UweL [n=chatzill@nat/sun/x-mjgfrdzgzljbfkrw] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:00:57) mdamboldt: Hi
(15:01:18) stefan__b: Hi! Greetings from Mechtilde. She can not attend but will read our minutes later today.
(15:01:50) lutzh [n=lutz@nat/sun/x-qacugtmzofsrapnc] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:01:54) mdamboldt: Looking at the 3.2 schedule, today is brach date for 3.2 release.
(15:02:04) mdamboldt: The m60 is currently in progress.
(15:02:57) mdamboldt: The OOO320_m0 will be created right after DEV300m60 is finished.
(15:03:09) dtardon_ [n=dtardon@nat/redhat/x-yduynnvtaoayidtm] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:03:23) Thalion72: means OOO320_m0 == DEV300m60 ?
(15:03:30) rtimm: mdamboldt: we won't provide a m0, does not make sense
(15:03:56) mdamboldt: rtimm: Correct, sorry for cofusion, the m0 is a technical detail only. Sorry again.
(15:03:59) _rene_: Thalion72: anything else would not make sense :)
(15:04:22) Thalion72: ok (I just wonderedwhy provide two builds that are equal ;) )
(15:05:20) mdamboldt: According to Wiki we defined "3.2 Beta (target is the first build after branch) "
(15:05:26) Thalion72: so MEchtildes question (OOO32_m1 will be beta) can be answered with "yes"?
(15:06:09) mdamboldt: Volker and others had requested to rename the "Beta" to "Preview".
(15:06:27) mdamboldt: I would give this request based on past discussion a "+1".
(15:07:04) ***Thalion72 would rather stay with "Beta"
(15:07:10) mdamboldt: Please note that this does not change anything in the schedule.
(15:08:16) VolkerMe: Thalion72: It is just for the outside view, the marketing guys will promote the preview version for people that are interested in testing
(15:08:34) rtimm: +1 for providing OOO320_m1 or OOO320_m2 as 'Preview' (though I personally could live with 'Beta' as well ...)
(15:08:49) ja_: I prefer "Preview" because this version won't come as fully localized build and it won't be an OpenOffice.org build but a OOo-Dev build
(15:09:02) Thalion72: VolkerMe: I know, that this just for outside view - and exactly therefore I'd prefere "Beta"
(15:09:12) Thalion72: anyway .. I can live with a preview ;)
(15:09:14) stefan__b: It is just a word, a name. there is no UX data fpor the amount of people jumping in on this/that name, I think.
(15:09:31) mdamboldt: Great, so I make a note we call it "Preview".
(15:10:15) mdamboldt: Regarding the milestone I would have a look at the 3.2 Beta release Stopper issue. Currently to items are registered,, one of them is already fixed.
(15:10:34) mdamboldt: I will ping the developers for the remaining open item.
(15:10:57) mdamboldt: Anything else related to 3.2 release(s)
(15:11:29) Thalion72: mdamboldt: lastminute change of icon sets
(15:12:15) Thalion72: there have been (imho valid) claims that the iconset might not be te "perfect" one
(15:12:18) mdamboldt: Thalion72: Yes, I read the thread on UX.
(15:12:37) Thalion72: SO i'dlove to see some public milestones, before we bring this into a release
(15:13:06) Thalion72: well .. there is no real "thread" at UX .. in fact we had no discussion yet, what the effects of the change would be
(15:13:26) Thalion72: e.g. Grey Icons on Grey StartCenter buttons are notvery helpfull imo
(15:13:35) lutzh: Thalion72: I doubt that we will ever achieve a "perfect" icons set anyway, certainly not without real user feedback. So far, based on the blog posting, the feedback is quite mixed.
(15:13:38) _rene_: sorry, being late..
(15:13:42) _rene_: when can we expect m60?
(15:14:09) _rene_: (yes, I read that it's "in progress", that
(15:14:13) Thalion72: lutzh: therefore I'dlike to delay this to 3.3 - to get more user feedback from "real OOo usage"
(15:14:14) _rene_: (yes, I read that it's "in progress", that's not the question ;))
(15:14:42) VolkerMe: I'm with Thalion72 at this point. I do not like this kind of changes without _any_ discussion.
(15:14:49) sophi: lutzh: and involve the art project too
(15:15:16) _rene_: AH
(15:15:25) _rene_: please no preview. PLEASE
(15:15:38) Thalion72: _rene_: to late :p
(15:15:39) _rene_: that would destroy proper order
(15:15:44) _rene_: p > b
(15:15:51) _rene_: that means I can't upload a beta later
(15:16:05) Thalion72: _rene_: there will be no beta
(15:16:38) _rene_: and how do you think 3.2.0~preview-1 would look? correct, bad :-)
(15:17:05) _rene_: (compared to 3.2.0~beta or ~alpha or whatever)
(15:17:06) lutzh: Thalion72: Especially in my former role as UX project lead, I have seen so many different ways users interact with files, that I am at a point where I don't think further design cycles will really improve the situation for users.
(15:17:36) lutzh: Thalion72: Admittedly, there are two points which I am willing to accept: the color coding and the ODF vs. application question.
(15:18:15) Thalion72: lutzh: ok - but if we integrate the icons *now* we have almost no chance to change them again
(15:18:21) lutzh: Thalion72: Putting the new icons into the release doesn't mean that they are carved into stone - the opposite is true: it will help us by providing *real life* user feedback.
(15:18:27) Thalion72: any change will weaken OOo's brand
(15:18:33) ja_: _rene_: I've asked ... m60 is not to be expected today anymore...probably tomorrow
(15:18:43) _rene_: especially wil it break going from preview to proper milestones again
(15:18:51) _rene_: p > m and p > d
(15:19:04) _rene_: ja_: brilliant :-(
(15:19:42) lutzh: Thalion72: If change happens eolutionary, not in complete re-design (which I think is unlikely), it won't break the brand story. Think about how other major brands "modernize" their logos.
(15:19:47) Thalion72: lutzh: this is, why we have public milestones - get user fedback on maybe controverse changes
(15:20:39) Thalion72: lutzh: my experience is other
(15:20:43) lutzh: Thalion72: Are non-community-members using public milestones? I mean people who use OO.o in production?
(15:21:31) Thalion72: lutzh: not in production .. but again -so far *noone* (outside Sun) had the chance to get some experience with the new icons
(15:21:58) lutzh: Thalion72: ...which doesn't mean that per se they are bad.
(15:22:31) Thalion72: lutzh: I did not say so ;) ... I just don't know - and think the risk for our brand is to high
(15:22:39) ***_rene_ wonders why people steadily need to invent new terms instead of the commonly known alpha/betas
(15:23:10) ***_rene_ also wonders why external contributors not working on OOo in paid work are not able to do their stuff on weekend where they have time ;-/
(15:24:23) lutzh: Thalion72: So far we didn't have an ODF brand, just a product brand. In fact we had many product brands, none contributing to the ODF story sufficiently.
(15:24:40) _rene_: but we already had that discussion...
(15:25:17) Thalion72: lutzh: I understand an support the request for a stronger ODF-brand ... but please dont rush it through (maybe at the cost of OOo brand)
(15:25:57) mdamboldt: I would like to ask lutzh and and all to continue the ODF icon related topic even more public, for example follow-up on discuss@ux.openoffice.org. All this is hot and important and might fit much better on the list than in this meeting today about the release in general.
(15:26:23) lutzh: mdamboldt: fine with that, gotta run anyway.
(15:26:35) Thalion72: mdamboldt: so far we had no answer at discuss@ux, why the change is needed (and why exactly atthis time)
(15:26:39) lutzh: Thalion72: see you on discuss@ux.
(15:26:46) Thalion72: lutzh: ok :)
(15:26:55) lutzh hat den Raum verlassen
(15:29:42) Thalion72: anything else? (buildbots?)
(15:29:50) mdamboldt: To catch up again on _rene_ with his comments about alpha/beta/preview. I've no strong opinion about the name. Any of those is fine for me. I understand the developer needs, so I do the marketing ones. For me it's imporant to have a such a release in time, this mean OOO320_m1 or OOO320_m2 latest.
(15:30:03) mdamboldt: Just let me know your outcome.
(15:30:13) _rene_: marketing is irrelevant. but that just my pov
(15:31:13) stefan__b: IMHO Marketing comes AFTER releasing. Until Release, all should be done to ease it for DEV. Means: Valuable Feedback to address showstoppers.
(15:31:41) _rene_: yep
(15:31:56) rtimm: marketing is why we do such extra thing. Get more awareness. Get more testing.
(15:32:15) Thalion72: stefan__b: you will only get "valuable feedback" if you correctly promote the builds - what is in fact a marketing issue
(15:32:19) sophi: Thalion72: I posted about it on tinderbox@tools mailing list, Gregor will work on displaying more info on the build enqueued and there was also a bug in the script that should be corrected by now
(15:33:32) stefan__b: Thalion72, but I am NOT interested in "QA Newbie" Feedback in times shortly before RC. I want the showstoppers to be found and reported, NOT a pile of nice-to-have-dupes from newbies.
(15:33:32) VolkerMe: stefan__b: _rene_: You are invited to write the PM for the alpha/beta/preview yourself. ;-) Testers should be attracted but no users should be displeased.
(15:34:12) Thalion72: stefan__b: if marketing and development does not work hand in hand, the results will please none of the both
(15:34:17) ja_: rtimm: +1
(15:34:29) _rene_: VolkerMe: I don't actually care about a PM either. press is overrated. And preview is even less "oh, that should be tried now" than "beta" marketing wise
(15:34:39) _rene_: VolkerMe: that's even less than "alha"
(15:34:40) _rene_: alpha
(15:35:05) rtimm: stefan__b: we repreatedly made the experience that people started to test and found real show stoppers when we called it 'rc', not earlier.
(15:35:12) rtimm: That's what we would like to change
(15:35:41) _rene_: and you think by calling it preview (which is in reception lesser than beta) that will change?
(15:35:49) rtimm: but, please don't start this whole discussion again from new :-(
(15:35:50) _rene_: "why is it preview and not a beta?"
(15:35:52) VolkerMe: _rene_: "Preview" was not my first choice. See my earlier proposal.
(15:36:14) _rene_: "there must be still big things in it, so let's wait for something more stable"
(15:36:17) Thalion72: hmm .. so nobody reallyy know, why we should call it "preview" anymore?
(15:36:37) _rene_: (I have no illusions, 3.2 will be bad anyway until 3.2.1, as always)
(15:36:52) mdamboldt: Thalion72: There were rumors you can call it only Beta if you have everything translated.
(15:37:16) rtimm: VolkerMe: sorry, there have been so many proposals ... What do you mean?
(15:37:16) _rene_: that rule is imposed by some people.
(15:37:17) _rene_: that doesn't really make sense.
(15:37:24) mdamboldt: Thalion72: Additional there were rumors that quality might not meet "Beta expectations"
(15:37:25) Thalion72: mdamboldt: who ever said this - it was not me (and I am somewhat responsible for GErman translation ;) )
(15:37:43) _rene_: mdamboldt: quality of the final will not meet final expectations either. :)
(15:37:55) VolkerMe: mdamboldt: -1 for beta, +1 for alpha or preview
(15:37:58) ja_: we want to invite people to have a look at a build that is feature complete but which doesn't have current localization included. Users expectation is too high if we call it "Beta"
(15:38:06) Thalion72: same for quality .. I#d expect that a Beta has some errors
(15:38:12) _rene_: mdamboldt: that'll only be archived with 3.2.1 - as always
(15:38:34) mdamboldt: From my point of view having an Alpha raisis expectation for a Beta which we don't have in our schedule.
(15:38:35) VolkerMe: mdamboldt: Mechtilde asked for "preview" instead of "alpha"
(15:38:48) ja_: mdamboldt: +1
(15:38:49) ***_rene_ remembers the big regressions found in 3.1 and only with fighting were fixed in 3.1.1...
(15:38:59) Thalion72: does someone have some dices? :)
(15:39:26) mdamboldt: Thalion72: Me!!!! - The just said calle it "Beta". :)
(15:39:39) Thalion72: mdamboldt: accepted :)
(15:41:08) VolkerMe: [15:09] <mdamboldt> Great, so I make a note we call it "Preview".
(15:41:28) mdamboldt: VolkerMe: But that was no a dice decission :)
(15:41:48) ***mdamboldt switching back to normal
(15:42:11) mdamboldt: As I already said I've no stron opinoin on that. Any name I can read in press is fine for me.
(15:42:25) mdamboldt: I understand _rene_ with the alphabetical issue.
(15:42:45) mdamboldt: I understand VolkerMe and the marketing issue.
(15:43:25) _rene_: mdamboldt: the alphabetical issue is not just taste, it has technical implications :-)
(15:43:48) _rene_: (version comparison algorithm...)
(15:43:50) mdamboldt: I wouldn't call it Alpha since it raises expectations for a Beta we don't have in our schedule yet. Anything will happen , but I won't shift the whoe release to introduce a second "preview-release" called Beta.
(15:44:00) ml2: so, lets make a poll to come to a decision?
(15:44:08) VolkerMe: This beta would be different to former ones, i.e. it will not have system integration
(15:44:26) VolkerMe: sorry ml2, let's poll
(15:44:58) Thalion72: direct pool here?
(15:45:16) VolkerMe: Where else
(15:45:20) VolkerMe: ?
(15:45:39) VolkerMe: There were almost no replys on releases@oo.o
(15:45:44) ml2: here or in a wiki, I don't care
(15:45:58) Thalion72: ok .. os rather here
(15:46:02) ja_: calling it "3.2 Preview" +1
(15:46:03) Thalion72: +1 for Beta
(15:46:10) _rene_: +1 for Beta
(15:46:16) ml2: +1 preview
(15:46:17) VolkerMe: +1 for "preview"
(15:46:18) sophi: +1 for Beta
(15:46:52) ***Thalion72 prays for one more vote
(15:46:54) _rene_: hrmpf. draw.
(15:46:56) stefan__b: +1 for Beta
(15:47:00) _rene_: yay :-)
(15:47:07) _Nesshof_: +1 beta
(15:47:10) mdamboldt: skip
(15:47:40) Thalion72: anyone else?
(15:47:44) _rene_: 5 : 3 in favour of beta if I didn't miss a vote
(15:48:07) Thalion72: _rene_: correct
(15:48:11) VolkerMe: _rene_: You can start to write the PR information.
(15:48:13) rtimm: call it as you like, just make it happen
(15:48:21) _rene_: VolkerMe: I will not write *any* PM
(15:48:43) VolkerMe: _rene_: OK, forgot the ;-)
(15:49:01) Thalion72: VolkerMe: to give _rene_some time for really important things, I'll help to write the PR
(15:49:15) rtimm: :-)
(15:49:33) mdamboldt: I assume I can now finally make a mark behind this topic......
(15:49:41) mdamboldt: Anything else about the 3.2 release?
(15:49:46) Thalion72: not for me
(15:49:59) mdamboldt: There was a note about buildbots inbetween.......
(15:50:01) UweL: no
(15:50:39) sophi: mdamboldt: I've send a mail to the buildbots list, and Gregor will take care to add additional info about pending builds
(15:50:44) mdamboldt: Looking again at sophies posting some minutes ago, I assume this topic is covered.
(15:50:55) sophi: mdamboldt: yes, it's ok for me
(15:51:05) ja_: I'll notify Florian Effenberger and John McCreesh to prepare for a Beta press announcement
(15:51:16) mdamboldt: anything else for today?
(15:51:20) ml2: from the agenda, issue 103543
(15:51:32) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT STARTED P2 Help Viewer, Contents page: Links don't show Help pages http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=103543
(15:52:06) mdamboldt: Thats the remaining Beta stopper I would go for and ask developer for details.
(15:52:18) dtardon_ hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "this parrot is dead").
(15:52:21) ml2: ah, ok
(15:53:33) mdamboldt: Regarding 103543: MAV is working on this currently. Fix not yet available.
(15:54:38) mdamboldt: Sounds thats all for today...
(15:54:44) mdamboldt: bye
(15:54:52) sophi: ok, bye all
(15:54:53) Thalion72: bye
(15:54:54) stefan__b: ahem....
(15:55:15) stefan__b: We have a fix for issue 105148
(15:55:20) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT RESOLVED FIXED P1 Crash after Draw-Objects are pasted http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=105148
(15:55:47) _rene_: but?
(15:55:49) stefan__b: That one is called P1. Easy scenario, IMHO BTa stopper. But CWS will be in QA tomorrow.
(15:57:19) mdamboldt: stefan_b: From my point of view clearly one for the Beta.
(15:57:35) _rene_: of course
(15:57:39) stefan__b: I stumbled over P1... Those are normally master-fixed, this one is "only in a CWS". But CWS will get approval this week, should do for Beta IMHO
(15:57:59) _rene_: stefan__b: there's also P1 issues not cared about at all, so.. :-(
(15:58:09) paveljanik hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "This computer has gone to sleep").
(15:58:22) mdamboldt: stefan_b: I would take that one as master fix.
(15:58:51) ***_rene_ still sees files obviously violating licenses in the tree. not only non-free stuff (actually they are free) but violating licenses..
(15:59:13) _rene_: mdamboldt: please not if it delays m60 :)
(15:59:25) _Nesshof_: _rene_: where ?
(15:59:38) _Nesshof_: _rene_: please send me a list
(15:59:44) _rene_: look at IZ
(15:59:54) _rene_: you are CCed
(15:59:59) _rene_: open since what? years?
(16:00:09) _rene_: no, you cannot tell me you don't know
(16:00:30) stefan__b: mdamboldt, it is in CWS sw32bf04. The whole CWS is worth integration before Beta, i.e. issue 105148 also adressed.
(16:00:35) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT RESOLVED FIXED P1 Crash after Draw-Objects are pasted http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=105148
(16:00:50) _rene_: stefan__b: copy/paste error? :-)
(16:01:04) stefan__b: Sorry. Issue 105149 is the other dramatic one.
(16:01:11) IZBot: xml DEFECT RESOLVED FIXED P3 Text fields are lost when saving file http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=105149
(16:01:51) stefan__b: As said, that CWS will get approval this week.
(16:02:08) stefan__b: Nothing else from me :-)
(16:05:11) ja_: ping
(16:05:37) _rene_: broadcast ping? :-)
(16:05:39) _rene_: pong :-)
(16:06:04) paveljanik [n=Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] hat den Raum betreten.
(16:08:25) ml2: bye
(16:08:53) ja_: _rene_: I just wanted to know if the IRC session is still active :)
(16:11:06) ja_: OK, as I assume the release status meeting is closed now, I can take the log file and start to write the minutes