[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[dev] Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] 'ODF Toolkit 1.0.0 BETA' & 'ODF Toolkit 0.9.0 Release Candidate'

Hi Michael, hi everyone!

Here some more information, I might have missed before:

a thousand thanks for the update of the CHANGES.txt, Michael. I have to
admit, I was simply running out of time in doing the preliminary releases
as I had to fetch my plane to Barcelona (holiday). Most time was consumed
by testing/figuring out the Maven release, which I started to document at

Aside from CHANGES.TXT there exist currently project-specific HTML
documentation, I had started to work on:
The perfect solution - we should strive for - would be to generate all the
documentation (HTML/TXT) for summary and project-specific directly from our
(I have recently seen a project that provides something similar: a release
with every commit, but I can not find the GitHub repro atm)
NOTE: All our GitHub HTML documentation from the master branch (as usually
done by GitHub
are being found at:
is generated from:
src\site\site\content\odftoolkit_website (seeing this, we might want to
consider to move the site content into the previous site folder to get rid
of the documentation)
I have added two bash files (I only work under Linux with the
documentation, which is created using an old Apache way, but it works with
the old markdown files - open for suggestions of simplifications - and
afterwards patches), see the documentation at

As well our download page still requires some update:
You realize that there were also bundles for the complete ODF Toolkit being
offered, shall we add this again? Any suggestions or takers?

Last but not least regarding the GIT branches. I have talked to Thorsten
and Oliver but must have forgotten to communicate it to you and the list.

- There is our master branch that is equivalent to the 0.9.0 release
- There is the 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT branch, which is obviously the 1.0.0
release branch. Every feature we are adding now to 0.9.0 should be manually
being copied to this branch, as the GIT merge work will not in the future.
I have manually merged the former Open-XChange fork into this 1.0.0 and
based my ProtoType collaboration work on this. This branch is at least more
than 4 man years ahead of 0.9.0. \o/
For instance, I have copied the update of CHANGES.txt on the master
branch to this branch this morning.
- I am still working on refactoring the operations. For example,
counting readable for humans should start with 1 similar as in XML and not
with 0. If we say the third paragraph it closer to our semantic to write a
'3' instead of '2' as computer science once taught us (wrong). Therefore I
was working to start list operations with 1 instead of 0. But it is more
complex as I hoped for and the branch is unfished:
Documentation on testing will be added by myself before the final
release. Developer promise ;-)

Uncertain how much time I might spend on updating the documentation during
my stay in Barcelona, but I will do my best to add something from time to

The problem with the JDK versions is that we are using the Java Taglets
generate a dynamic reference in each JavaDoc of every generated ODF element
and attribute class to its explanation in the local added ODF 1.2 HTML
specification. The path of the HTML specification is given during JavaDoc
build time.
The problem is that till JDK 1.8 for taglets the usage of the tools.jar was
required, which becomes after JDK 8 an implementation detail. Starting with
JDK 9 a new Taglet API was being added. The new Taglet API is being used
with 1.0.0 (>=JDK 9) and the old tools.jar approach with 0.9.0 (=JDK 1.8).
For this reason, we have the JDK requirements. JDK 9 and JDK 11 are long
term support versions, therefore I have once added in an old documentation
JDK 11. But I must admit I have not tested (nor I have been looking for a
tool) which JDK is the minimum required one for the 1.0.0 branch. For
testing, I have been using the following Windows and Linux configuration
(output via mvn --version). I have no MacBook, but I have tested two weeks
ago at the LibreOffice HackFest the configuration on a borrowed MacBook. ;-)

Apache Maven 3.6.2 (40f52333136460af0dc0d7232c0dc0bcf0d9e117;
Java version: 12.0.2, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Default locale: de_DE, platform encoding: Cp1252
OS name: "windows 10", version: "10.0", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"

Apache Maven 3.6.0
Maven home: /usr/share/maven
Java version: 12.0.2, vendor: Private Build, runtime:
Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8
OS name: "linux", version: "4.18.0-18-generic", arch: "amd64", family:

Apache Maven 3.6.2 (40f52333136460af0dc0d7232c0dc0bcf0d9e117;
Java version: 1.8.0_221, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Default locale: de_DE, platform encoding: Cp1252
OS name: "windows 10", version: "10.0", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"

Apache Maven 3.6.0
Maven home: /usr/share/maven
Java version: 1.8.0_222, vendor: Private Build, runtime:
Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8
OS name: "linux", version: "4.18.0-18-generic", arch: "amd64", family:

*Help is Desired*
None of us is being paid to work on this project, so if you like to use it
or think it is worth to improve it, please support it.
A friend recently compared open-source with a soccer game. You might watch
or play soccer, but it is always more fun to play for yourself and there
will be no game if nobody is playing...

¡Saludos desde Barcelona!

Am Mo., 7. Okt. 2019 um 12:44 Uhr schrieb Michael Stahl <mst@libreoffice.org

> hi Svante,
> On 06.10.19 22:35, Svante Schubert wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The ODF Toolkit team is pleased to announce the first beta of ODF
> > Toolkit 1.0.0 (using >=JDK 9) and also a release candidate of ODF
> > Toolkit 0.9.0 (using JDK 8).
> CHANGES.txt says 1.0.0 will require JDK 11, not JDK 9 - which is it?
> > A preliminary list of changes is available in our release notes [1]
> > <https://tdf.github.io/odftoolkit/docs/odfdom/ReleaseNotes.html>.
> okay... i'm thinking "JDK 8 support" is a bit of an euphemism and it's
> more that it's required to build?
> ... but what i find a bit confusing, the ODFDOM component of the toolkit
> has its own release notes page - which wasn't maintained during the ASF
> period of the project - whereas the other components don't, and there's
> no overarching Toolkit release notes page.
> okay now i found CHANGES.txt, which is linked from the download page...
> i've added the issues that were fixed in this release to it.
> this is based on the following ASF JIRA query and lots of manual review
> because most issues dont have the Fix Version field set:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODFTOOLKIT-232?filter=-5&jql=project%20%3D%20ODFTOOLKIT%20AND%20resolution%20in%20(Fixed%2C%20Implemented%2C%20Done%2C%20%22Auto%20Closed%22%2C%20%22Pending%20Closed%22%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Workaround%2C%20Staged%2C%20Delivered)%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(EMPTY%2C%200.7-incubating)%20order%20by%20priority%20DESC%2Cupdated%20DESC
> for github issues, i notice there aren't even versions anywhere, so not
> sure what to do i added a "milestone" "0.9" to the 3 issues that look to
> be fixed. is this the best way or would it be better to have a label
> for each version? can you have more than 1 "milestone" per issue?
> are we going to have a release branch for 0.9?
> anyway see commit 4f8b7572a3cdddaad697fe4666bdab260319b9d7
> > All new ODF Toolkit components (with their binary, source and JavaDoc
> > bundles) are available in the central Maven repository under Group ID
> > "org.apache.odftoolkit" and Version "1.0.0-BETA1" and "0.9.0-RC1" and
> > are referenced by the README [2]
> > <https://tdf.github.io/odftoolkit/#release-candidate>.
> i don't see a tag for the release candidate in git - could you please
> tag the commit so i can be confident that i'm building the right commit
> for testing?
> > Kind regards,
> > Svante
> >
> > [1] https://tdf.github.io/odftoolkit/docs/odfdom/ReleaseNotes.html
> > [2] https://tdf.github.io/odftoolkit/#release-candidate
> >
> > PS: If someone has provided some patch(es) and would like to be listed
> > in the developer's section of the pom.xml and on the website, just
> > provide a patch and you are in! :-)

To unsubscribe e-mail to: dev+unsubscribe@odftoolkit.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.odftoolkit.org/dev/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.