Libreoffice source disappeared

Libreoffice source disappeared

[Chris Marusich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3075 bytes --]

Hi,

I did a "guix pull" today and found out that I couldn't build my profile
because the source for LibreOffice 5.4.7.1 is missing.  It seems to have
been removed from the various mirrors.  I've fixed the LibreOffice
problem by bumping the libreoffice package to 5.4.7.2 in commit
7376ba4cd4d07b5640ab49acad371a8ef3f090bc.  Before doing this, I verified
that (1) it builds and (2) the LibreOffice programs still work when
installed.

The LibreOffice version scheme is described here:

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#Version_scheme

It looks like version 5.4.7.2 is supposed to be the 2nd release
candidate of the 7th bugfix release in the 5.4 series.  This appears to
be the ChangeLog going from 5.4.7.1 to 5.4.7.2:

ftp.cixug.es/tdf/libreoffice/src/bugs-changelog-libreoffice-5-4-7-release-5.4.7.2.log
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
+ sw: handle cell background for BACKGROUND_PARA_OVER_DRAWINGS (bnc#778133) [Miklos Vajna]
+ bad-cast (ofz#7648) [Caolán McNamara]
+ update credits (rdm#2585) [Christian Lohmaier]
+ message box fonts corrupted in libreoffice (rhbz#1283420) [Caolán McNamara]
+ When overwriting a cell, new content is displayed on top of the old content until finishing the edit (tdf#100925) [Caolán McNamara]
+ DOCX import: lack of Word 2013-style increased spacing for paragraph with anchored objects (tdf#115719) [Miklos Vajna]
+ FILEOPEN DOCX: First paragraph has wrong top margin (space before) (tdf#116410) [Miklos Vajna]
+ DOCX import: table cell background is behind background shapes (tdf#116830) [Miklos Vajna]
+ Automatic text color in textbox does not consider fill style of shape (tdf#116925) [Miklos Vajna]
+ DOCX import: bitmap does not consume its relative size (tdf#116976) [Miklos Vajna]
+ DOCX import, shape with textbox: incorrect text area size when shape size is relative (tdf#116985) [Miklos Vajna]
+ Libreoffice command line interface is not opening cgm files (tdf#116999) [Caolán McNamara]
+ DOCX import: textbox of shape lacks its transparent background (tdf#117028) [Miklos Vajna]
+ Print Preview crashes on signed document (tdf#117039) [Katarina Behrens]
+ FILEOPEN: RTF: parser dont draw tables correctly (tdf#117268) [Mike Kaganski]
+ FILESAVE: Theme Colors inverted in drawings after PPTX roundtrip (black part turned to white) (tdf#84205) [Szymon Kłos]
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

These changes seem minor, as expected.

Is there any reason we shouldn't just use the latest LibreOffice
release, which appears to be 6.1.0.0?

FYI, when I asked on the LibreOffice IRC channel, they told me that old
releases can be found here:

http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/5.4.7.1/src/libreoffice-5.4.7.1.tar.xz

Maybe we should add the "old" archives (and mirrors thereof, if any
exist) to the list of mirrors, so that when they remove a published
release, we have a chance of automatically fetching it from the "old"
archives.  What do you think?

-- 
Chris

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Libreoffice source disappeared

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1313 bytes --]

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:22:27PM -0700, Chris Marusich wrote:
> The LibreOffice version scheme is described here:
> 
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#Version_scheme
> 
> It looks like version 5.4.7.2 is supposed to be the 2nd release
> candidate of the 7th bugfix release in the 5.4 series.  This appears to
> be the ChangeLog going from 5.4.7.1 to 5.4.7.2:

Thanks for looking this up. I didn't realize 5.4.7.1 was a release
candidate.

> Is there any reason we shouldn't just use the latest LibreOffice
> release, which appears to be 6.1.0.0?

I did the 5.4.7.1 update instead of 6.1 because I figured it would
probably build without having to tweak the package recipe (it did) and I
was short on time.

There's no reason to delay updating to LibreOffice 6.

> FYI, when I asked on the LibreOffice IRC channel, they told me that old
> releases can be found here:
> 
> http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/5.4.7.1/src/libreoffice-5.4.7.1.tar.xz
> 
> Maybe we should add the "old" archives (and mirrors thereof, if any
> exist) to the list of mirrors, so that when they remove a published
> release, we have a chance of automatically fetching it from the "old"
> archives.  What do you think?

Yes, we should add this alternate address.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: Libreoffice source disappeared

[Chris Marusich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2973 bytes --]

Hi Leo!

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:

> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:22:27PM -0700, Chris Marusich wrote:
>> The LibreOffice version scheme is described here:
>> 
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#Version_scheme
>> 
>> It looks like version 5.4.7.2 is supposed to be the 2nd release
>> candidate of the 7th bugfix release in the 5.4 series.  This appears to
>> be the ChangeLog going from 5.4.7.1 to 5.4.7.2:
>
> Thanks for looking this up. I didn't realize 5.4.7.1 was a release
> candidate.

I chatted with some folks in #libreoffice on Freenode, and I learned the
following facts about the LibreOffice release procedure:

* They always maintains two versions simultaneously.  Right now that's
  version 6 and version 5.

* The release of 5.4.7 has not yet been announced.  It looks like
  announcements happen here:
  https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/announce/

* For a given version X.Y.Z, the release cycle behaves like this:

  * Before the release is announced, any number of X.Y.Z.N release
    candidates may be published.  Based on what we saw just recently, as
    new releases are added, the old ones will be removed from the main
    download location.

  * Once the release is announced, no further X.Y.Z.N release candidates
    will be published, and the last "N" is used as the X.Y.Z release.

So, the reason 5.4.7.2 replaced 5.4.7.1 when it came out is because the
5.4.7 release hasn't been announced yet.  Until the 5.4.7 release has
been announced, we might see more release candidates (e.g., 5.4.7.3).

>> Is there any reason we shouldn't just use the latest LibreOffice
>> release, which appears to be 6.1.0.0?
>
> I did the 5.4.7.1 update instead of 6.1 because I figured it would
> probably build without having to tweak the package recipe (it did) and I
> was short on time.
>
> There's no reason to delay updating to LibreOffice 6.

OK.  Since LibreOffice officially supports both 5 and 6, we could also
choose to offer both 5 and 6 if the maintenance burden isn't too high.
I do not plan to add this myself (but I might - you never know), so
anyone who is interested should feel free to try adding LibreOffice 6.

>> FYI, when I asked on the LibreOffice IRC channel, they told me that old
>> releases can be found here:
>> 
>> http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/5.4.7.1/src/libreoffice-5.4.7.1.tar.xz
>> 
>> Maybe we should add the "old" archives (and mirrors thereof, if any
>> exist) to the list of mirrors, so that when they remove a published
>> release, we have a chance of automatically fetching it from the "old"
>> archives.  What do you think?
>
> Yes, we should add this alternate address.

Actually, today they told me that the "old" location contains
everything, even the new releases.  To simplify things, perhaps we
should always just use the "old" location.  What do you think?

-- 
Chris

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Libreoffice source disappeared

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Chris Marusich <cmmarusich@gmail.com> writes:

> * For a given version X.Y.Z, the release cycle behaves like this:
>
>   * Before the release is announced, any number of X.Y.Z.N release
>     candidates may be published.  Based on what we saw just recently, as
>     new releases are added, the old ones will be removed from the main
>     download location.
>
>   * Once the release is announced, no further X.Y.Z.N release candidates
>     will be published, and the last "N" is used as the X.Y.Z release.
>
> So, the reason 5.4.7.2 replaced 5.4.7.1 when it came out is because the
> 5.4.7 release hasn't been announced yet.  Until the 5.4.7 release has
> been announced, we might see more release candidates (e.g., 5.4.7.3).

Oh, that’s counter intuitive.  I would have thought that 5.4.7.3 would
be more recent than 5.4.7, and I think that the Guix version comparator
would agree.

Does this mean we should avoid release candidates?

>>> FYI, when I asked on the LibreOffice IRC channel, they told me that old
>>> releases can be found here:
>>> 
>>> http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/5.4.7.1/src/libreoffice-5.4.7.1.tar.xz
>>> 
>>> Maybe we should add the "old" archives (and mirrors thereof, if any
>>> exist) to the list of mirrors, so that when they remove a published
>>> release, we have a chance of automatically fetching it from the "old"
>>> archives.  What do you think?
>>
>> Yes, we should add this alternate address.
>
> Actually, today they told me that the "old" location contains
> everything, even the new releases.  To simplify things, perhaps we
> should always just use the "old" location.  What do you think?

It’s fine to use both.

-- 
Ricardo

Re: Libreoffice source disappeared

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1616 bytes --]

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 12:13:56AM -0700, Chris Marusich wrote:
> * For a given version X.Y.Z, the release cycle behaves like this:
> 
>   * Before the release is announced, any number of X.Y.Z.N release
>     candidates may be published.  Based on what we saw just recently, as
>     new releases are added, the old ones will be removed from the main
>     download location.
> 
>   * Once the release is announced, no further X.Y.Z.N release candidates
>     will be published, and the last "N" is used as the X.Y.Z release.
> 
> So, the reason 5.4.7.2 replaced 5.4.7.1 when it came out is because the
> 5.4.7 release hasn't been announced yet.  Until the 5.4.7 release has
> been announced, we might see more release candidates (e.g., 5.4.7.3).

Okay, who could have guessed? ;)

Generally, we don't package release candidates, so let's add a comment
in the LibreOffice package definition to avoid doing this again.

> OK.  Since LibreOffice officially supports both 5 and 6, we could also
> choose to offer both 5 and 6 if the maintenance burden isn't too high.
> I do not plan to add this myself (but I might - you never know), so
> anyone who is interested should feel free to try adding LibreOffice 6.

The maintenance burden would mostly consist of waiting for the loooooong
LibreOffice compilation to finish.

> Actually, today they told me that the "old" location contains
> everything, even the new releases.  To simplify things, perhaps we
> should always just use the "old" location.  What do you think?

Yeah, let's just use "old" and add a code comment explaining it.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]