Hi Bert, Thank you very much for clarifying things. I'd hate to think I was ignoring people deliberately. I'll have a good look at the issue mentioned as soon as I can.
And to everybody, it's been pointed out to me that my autoreply has not been switched off. As this is done on our server and our administrator is still enjoying the holidays, it can't be switched off. Apologies for the inconvenience! Kind regards, Nicole -----Original Message----- From: Bert Meersma [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:42 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Santiago Seminario; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [loc] Review procedure Hi Nicole, Thank you very much for responding to this. Please find my comments below. Nicole Dijkstra wrote: >Dear All, > >I hope you've all had a very good Christmas. > It was very good indeed. Thanks. I hope yours was good too. >I've just been going through a lot of emails regarding Office, and I'm doing >my best to come up to speed again. Bear with me, this is somewhat difficult >after Christmas holidays. > Looks to me like it's no problem at all. >I've seen the discussion regarding the best way to implement changes. I'm >with Santiago in that it would be great to do it module by module, to have >all the changes for one part, implement them and finish that part. However, >I understand this is difficult with so many people working on this very hard >in their spare time, and I see different solutions are being sought. > Right now, everybody is picking a piece of the help that they relate to the most. But I think we can arrange it in such a way that we do it module by module. We will have to discuss this on this list. >Wasn't the last suggestion to go through what Natalie has already checked, >implement any changes and in the case of FFE implement these everywhere >(that is provided we get the whole Help)? It seems a good idea to weed out >the FFE to me, so that reviewers at least don't have to worry about them >anymore for the remainder of the review. > That was indeed the last suggestion and I still think it's a good one. And I'm glad you also think it's a good one. >Regarding Natalie, I received a mail from her via a mail from Bert, I did >not receive her mail directly. There's an address in this mail, but it seems >I can't reply to this directly. However, this makes me wonder whether I did >not subscribe to a particular list, thereby missing this message. It arrived >on Thursday when I was on holiday, but still, it refered to an earlier >issue. It seems I failed to look at or respond to something. If so, I can >only apologise. This was by no means intentional, and I'd like to sort this >out. Any help greatly appreciated. > Natalie has posted posted some comments for Alpha (you) in issue 59216. But she didn't get an answer to it, most probably because you never saw it. So I took the liberty of adding you to the cc list of that issue. That way, you will get a mail each time something changes with the issue. If you don't want this, let me know and I will remove you from the cc list. To respond to these comments you can login to the OOo site, go to issue 59216 and add comments to it. Regards, Bert -- __________________________________________________ Broxtor on irc.freenode.net (#nl.openoffice.org) Meepraten op IRC? Download een korte handleiding vanaf: http://home.wanadoo.nl/rijmeer/handleiding_IRC.pdf --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
