ReleaseStatus Minutes 2008-02-04 IRC log

(14:58:00) ja_: Hi everyone
(14:58:20) TrainedMonkey: hi
(14:58:27) MechtiIde: hello
(14:59:19) _Nesshof_ [n=mh@sd-socks-197.staroffice.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:59:25) MechtiIde: ja_, which version do you want to publish next
(14:59:31) ja_: m6
(14:59:38) MechtiIde: ok
(14:59:40) rtimm [n=rt@nat/sun/x-f00bc93d80a5f741] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:00:07) MechtiIde: then I can compare sun version against pavel version
(15:01:59) _Nesshof_: moin
(15:02:10) bettina-h: moin
(15:03:50) _Nesshof_: blocker list for 2.4 is http://www.openoffice.org/issues/showdependencytree.cgi?id=84957
(15:04:36) _Nesshof_: we have open issue 85734
(15:04:43) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT STARTED P3 Loading an Ichitaro Template launches "Office Update Available" dialog http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=85734
(15:05:36) mdamboldt [n=md97092@sd-socks-197.staroffice.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:05:50) _rene_: what is "Ichitaro"?
(15:06:15) _Nesshof_: _rene_: a word processort fileformat
(15:06:33) _rene_: aha, /me neither did know it nor did know we have a filter for it
(15:06:49) _Nesshof_: also open is issue 84209
(15:06:55) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT NEW P3 Letter wizard broken on 64-bit systems http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=84209
(15:07:04) _rene_: where the summary is wrong
(15:07:12) _rene_: it's also broken on other systems
(15:07:21) _rene_: (see the comments)
(15:07:50) _rene_: and as your autotexts found it, it can't be 64-bit specific since you don't test 64-bit yet, do you? 8and if you didn, the OR would have mentioned it ;) )
(15:08:11) _Nesshof_: and marked as duplicate to issue 83670
(15:08:18) IZBot: Word processor DEFECT CLOSED WORKSFORME P2 [CWS langstatusbar] Letter wizard not working and office can not be closed normally thereafter http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=83670
(15:08:26) _Nesshof_: weired
(15:09:15) _rene_: yeah
(15:09:28) _rene_: that issue also was bogus, but sb did a new issue
(15:09:40) _rene_: probably he just wanted to reference the old
(15:09:51) _rene_: but anyway, this is not 64-bit specific.
(15:09:58) _rene_: it's not even JVM-specific
(15:10:25) blauwal [n=jr93709@sd-socks-197.staroffice.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:15:19) _Nesshof_: msc_sun: is stefan_b in vacation ?
(15:15:46) ***_Nesshof_ just spoke to os, he is looking for a system to reproduce
(15:16:42) UweL [n=chatzill@sd-socks-197.staroffice.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:17:05) UweL: sorry for beeing late :-)
(15:17:38) _Nesshof_: issue 85381 is fixed on master I think
(15:17:47) IZBot: tools PATCH STARTED P1 Heap corruption bug in dmake http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=85381
(15:17:55) _rene_: yep
(15:18:12) _Nesshof_: and also the helplinker issue is open issue 83545
(15:18:20) IZBot: utilities DEFECT STARTED P2 helplinker dies while building helpcontent2/util/sbasic http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=83545
(15:20:01) _Nesshof_: this one is still under investigation by ab and kr
(15:20:44) _Nesshof_: last cws integration date will be on Thursday this week
(15:21:35) _Nesshof_: and we still have 61 issues on target 2.4
(15:22:43) TrainedMonkey: _Nesshof_: this regression http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=85624 created by an irresponsible Novell hacker should be fixed too
(15:22:49) IZBot: issue 85624: Word processor DEFECT RESOLVED FIXED P3 WW8: exporting and opening again, turns header/footer on
(15:24:24) _Nesshof_: TrainedMonkey: ok
(15:25:02) _Nesshof_: rtimm: RE duties this week ?
(15:25:37) _rene_: ... needless to say, there's still a windows person needed for cws hyphenexternal ...
(15:26:00) _Nesshof_: UweL: there are a number of issues still assigned to qa people !
(15:26:05) ***TrainedMonkey sees all heads looking at the tips of their feet after _rene_'s statement
(15:26:29) rtimm: _Nesshof_: Kurt (kz) will do OOH680, Ivo (ihi) SRC680.
(15:26:45) _Nesshof_: blauwal: rtimm issue 66919 ?
(15:26:57) IZBot: ui DEFECT NEW P3 Export as PDF dialog is missing labels en-GB build http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66919
(15:27:03) _Nesshof_: blauwal: issue 80816 ?
(15:27:14) IZBot: udk DEFECT NEW P2 OOo cannot start if SELinux is active http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=80816
(15:27:33) _Nesshof_: TrainedMonkey: issue 73301 ?
(15:27:49) IZBot: udk PATCH NEW P3 support application/octet-stream mime type in package manager http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=73301
(15:29:00) TrainedMonkey: _Nesshof_: what should I do with it? I will poke Florian. But that is all I can do
(15:29:14) _Nesshof_: TrainedMonkey: thanks
(15:30:40) blauwal: _Nesshof_: mom, have a look at the issues
(15:31:57) _Nesshof_: I discussed with Matthias Bauer the idea to introduce an issue owner named "nobody" to indicate that nobody is assgned on a issue in an certain amount of time
(15:32:04) _Nesshof_: what others do think about this ?
(15:32:08) TrainedMonkey: _Nesshof_: please, do it for OOoLater, the http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=73301 Florian is not online and I don't see this being able to go into 2.4
(15:32:15) IZBot: issue 73301: udk PATCH NEW P3 support application/octet-stream mime type in package manager
(15:32:30) blauwal: _Nesshof_: 66919 might no longer be valid, otherwise will be set to 3.0
(15:32:32) TrainedMonkey: _Nesshof_: that will make the issue to be basically even easier ignored
(15:32:51) _Nesshof_: TrainedMonkey: OOoLater for a patch ?
(15:32:51) ***_rene_ agrees with TrainedMonkey
(15:33:10) _rene_: besides that, don't we already have "requirements"? ;-)
(15:33:24) blauwal: _Nesshof_: You declines issue 80816 for 2.4 (libXinerama stuff)
(15:33:35) blauwal: s/declines/declined/
(15:33:36) IZBot: udk DEFECT NEW P2 OOo cannot start if SELinux is active http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=80816
(15:34:38) TrainedMonkey: _Nesshof_: is mba going to have his developers to query every week the nobody's issues to see whether they should take over some of them. IMHO, we are creating a black hole
(15:35:43) _Nesshof_: the black hole is already there, this just makes it clear for issue submitters that there is really no work planned for resolving such issues
(15:35:57) TrainedMonkey: and nobody to poke
(15:36:09) _Nesshof_: an example for this are the issues with target OOoLater and P4 and P5
(15:36:10) TrainedMonkey: simply a real real blackhole :)
(15:36:41) _Nesshof_: if you want to poke somebody, ask the project lead or the dev-list
(15:37:21) TrainedMonkey: anyway, there is no problem with me. Black holes can be quite exciting, especially if they make part of a black body
(15:39:48) bettina-h: _Nesshof_: For the requirements I introduced long time ago the owner 'requirements' to have one pool for them. Do we want to differ between an own owner for bugs and features / enhancements or should we take the same one for bugs and RFEs?
(15:40:26) _rene_: bettina-h: yeah, the requirements which is a black hole and where stuff gets out only after years if at all...
(15:40:45) _Nesshof_: bettina-h: I would differentiate beween bugs and rfes
(15:40:47) bettina-h: _rene_ that is wrong.
(15:40:48) _rene_: bettina-h: also even important stuff for users
(15:40:52) _rene_: bettina-h: that is right.
(15:41:00) _rene_: bettina-h: look at the issues assigned to requirements
(15:41:08) _rene_: bettina-h: there's important stuff there years old
(15:41:13) _rene_: bettina-h: without *any* comment
(15:41:58) bettina-h: The evaluated issues have been handed over to development to plan and decide about long time ago.
(15:42:09) _rene_: bettina-h: and sometimes, something gets out of requirements, but that sometimes takes years
(15:42:26) _rene_: bettina-h: aha, please look at issues assigned to requirements then please again
(15:42:35) _rene_: bettina-h: for most of them, this simply is not true
(15:42:54) _rene_: bettina-h: they linger around without action for years
(15:42:56) _Nesshof_: unfortunatly nobody@openoffice.org is already a registered user
(15:43:34) _rene_: bettina-h: I can understand you want to defend yourself and try to make it sounds requirements is OK, but it's not.
(15:44:20) _rene_: even major sun managers agree with this (I won't tell names here, if you want to know them I can tell :))
(15:45:21) bettina-h: _rene_ Issues need decisions, that's why they became assigned to one owner. And it is always welcome to take them to work on. And, I don't need to 'defend' myself, I have sighted through hundreds and categorized.
(15:45:49) _rene_: bettina-h: still, you can't deny that issues lie at requirements for years without action on the issue
(15:45:52) _rene_: bettina-h: that is a fact
(15:46:40) _rene_: query your bugs and look at the dates they were submitted/assigned to requirements. you'll see. they are still assigned to requirements
(15:47:13) bettina-h: And to change that, issues got organized. And the community has also helped on it.
(15:47:58) bettina-h: And can of course always help on working on them.
(15:48:55) _Nesshof_: probably we can use unassigned for such issues
(15:49:04) bettina-h: _rene_ It is intended to have them on one owner, so that they can be easily queried.
(15:49:23) _rene_: bettina-h: if that works out like requirements, please not.
(15:49:48) _rene_: bettina-h: I know of trivial/important bugs lying *still* at requirements
(15:49:53) _rene_: bettina-h: for *years*
(15:50:41) _Nesshof_: why should help to move such rfe to a real person who is also not working on it ?
(15:51:15) _rene_: it doesn't help either to move it to a black hole where no one ever will care or even *look* at it either
(15:51:17) _Nesshof_: doesn't change anything but give the impression that there will start work on it by that person. ..
(15:51:33) TrainedMonkey: the only thing this will do that there will be nobody to poke and the corresponding teams will score better in median-time of response. If that can bring them some end-of-year bonuses, I vote for my friends having more money
(15:51:43) _Nesshof_: _rene_: bettina-h just explained, that in that way you are able to query it
(15:51:57) _rene_: _Nesshof_: which apparently doesn't happen
(15:52:01) _Nesshof_: and makes it clear to other that this _is_ a black hole
(15:52:05) _rene_: _Nesshof_: not now. why do you think it will change?
(15:52:50) ***_rene_ doesn't like such black holes.
(15:53:09) _rene_: especially not for important issues
(15:53:15) ***_Nesshof_ doesn't like them too, but they are reality
(15:53:16) ***blauwal thinks that not liking them does not make them go away
(15:53:24) _rene_: RfEs (if they are real enhancements) is something else
(15:53:38) _Nesshof_: _rene_: I agree that for important issues there should be always be an owner
(15:53:49) _rene_: blauwal: yeah, but we should not ass *another* one
(15:54:12) blauwal: _rene_: It's the same with a different name
(15:54:12) TrainedMonkey: who determines what is important. These are elastic terms
(15:54:19) _rene_: _Nesshof_: then get bettina-h to process some of the requirements' issues please :-)
(15:54:41) _rene_: s/ass/add/
(15:55:25) _Nesshof_: _rene_: currently I'm not talking about requirements but defects
(15:55:40) _Nesshof_: thats why I want to have different black wholes
(15:56:02) bettina-h: That already has happened two years ago by handing over those issues in categories with votings and keywords to development. RFEs are not the same as bugs. It needs more planning.
(15:56:08) _rene_: you want to let *DEFECTS* be lost in a black hole?
(15:56:09) _Nesshof_: and it's not true at all that rfe aren't looked at
(15:56:19) _rene_: so that they never get fixed?
(15:56:25) _Nesshof_: e.g. in Writer some of the refs got implemented
(15:56:32) _rene_: that's even worse than (important) ENHANCEMENTS
(15:56:42) _Nesshof_: _rene_: if nobody raise them as being important, no
(15:58:19) _Nesshof_: _rene_: look at that calc project, nn have assigned almost 500 issues
(15:58:51) _Nesshof_: I'm sure he will never have the chance to spend more then some seconds to Ooo Later / p5 issues
(15:59:35) _Nesshof_: and he has 130 of them
(16:00:04) _Nesshof_: of course some of them are important and should stay on the projects agenda
(16:00:23) _Nesshof_: but most are not relevant I guess
(16:00:34) stefan_b [n=Stefan@nat/sun/x-885e16fa851285e3] hat den Raum betreten.
(16:01:10) rtimm: Do we have something to discuss here which really is 'release' related? Otherwise I'd like to leave ...
(16:01:40) _rene_: yes, I still need a Windows person for cws hyphenexternal.
(16:01:41) _rene_: asap
(16:01:47) _Nesshof_: rtimm: you're right the hour is over now, lets continue discussion about this next week
(16:02:10) _rene_: can I please get one?
(16:02:30) ***rtimm is no 'windows person'
(16:04:35) _rene_: but you have such people at Sun...
(16:08:31) ***_rene_ has neither a windows build env nor windows build knowledge
(16:08:45) rtimm hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Remote closed the connection).
(16:09:05) _rene_: the first one can be fixed if someone gives me all the packages needed (I do not want to register at all at M$) and the latter can maybe be fixed someday later...
(16:10:12) UweL hat den Raum verlassen (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.77 [Firefox 1.5.0.12/2007050813]").
(16:11:34) blauwal: _rene_: see it will nor work that way. I'm no windows person either and neither of us can "order" someone to work on this. Either Martin finds someone or he doesn't.
(16:11:44) _rene_: and note that I have *NO* hesitation at all to play IZ/EIS ping-pong for the cws/issue when someonw wants to retarget it
(16:12:49) _rene_: blauwal: sorry, that is wrong. the "boss" of the windows guys can :)
(16:13:17) blauwal: _rene_: There is no "boss" of the windows guys.
(16:14:05) _rene_: ok, as said, I can try it myself (but I don't have hopes getting far when someone gives me a build env :)
(16:14:30) ja_: bye
(16:14:32) _rene_: but I'd prefer that someone who *does* know windows building and can fix it in a magnotide faster than me did this