[Libreoffice] [libreoffice-l10n] Re: REMINDER: Release 3.4.0-rc1 from ooo-build-3-2-1 branch == string and UI freeze

Cor Nouws oolst at nouenoff.nl
Tue May 3 04:58:08 PDT 2011

Hi Michael,

Michael Meeks wrote (03-05-11 12:30)

> On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 21:28 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>> Yes I do too, but the issue is that we didn't test the betas at all yet
>> due to this bug
> 	Which sucks; hopefully the Windows&  Mac builds have been use-able for
> testing - and of course, the snapshots of them.

But are we relative sure that this does that give enough feedback from 
people we can expect to help testing?

>> and it covers a quiet large range of distributions. So, may be we should
>> really take time to test the RC fully before really calling it an RC
>> and spread the word around it.
> 	The danger of this - is that by introducing further delay into the
> release pipeline - we slow down our ability to respond to bugs that are

I don't see this problem. The current build scheme can be kept, just in 
the naming there will be a shift.

> found, and since we are releasing a build per week anyway - we can only
> really choose to miss out a week: which isn't that wonderful :-) Already
> we only have a few days to fix a bug in RC<n>  and get the fix out in
> RC<n+1>.
> 	-Far- better for people to be running and using the daily snapshot
> releases and reporting bugs against them - instead of waiting for RCs
> (per-se).

Yes, but as mentioned before: people have to get used to this way of 
Plus that still the snapshots (and betas) will replace the stable 
version, which does not help testing too.
So that are all pointers that we are risking quality.

> 	Having said that - warning that RC1 may be a bit rough in the release
> notes is a good idea :-) - although, given that this is caused by some

I will have to advice people to be very careful with installing a RC1 
that has been probably tested rather little and is to replace the stable 
version and also introduces a lot of changes in our code base.

> obscure compiler problem - apparently only present on the gross / old
> system we compile the binaries on for Linux, I'm optimistic that once it
> is fixed we'll not be in such terrible shape.

I try to share your optimism, but would feel far more comfortable with 
an intermediate step looking at the very special situation.
Would it bring someone in big trouble?

Kind regards,

  - http://nl.libreoffice.org
  - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list