[dev] About OOo digital signature OOoConf 2008.
Hi all, the subject topic is the one presented at OOoConf 2008, e.g. this one: http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2008/programme/friday_abstracts.html#a1419 Are there any development in that area? I'm curious, since I'm restarting an extension project about digital signature I suspended some months ago. BeppeC. -- Kind Regards, Giuseppe Castagno Acca Esse http://www.acca-esse.eu giuseppe.casta...@acca-esse.eu beppe...@openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
Re: [dev] amount of stopper / regressions for 3.1 release
Hi André, André Schnabel wrote: Hi Ingrid, Ingrid Halama schrieb: Mathias Bauer wrote: The problem is that the usual test runs obviously don't find the bugs That is not obvious to me. Too often the mandatory tests haven't been run. And if tests do not find an important problem, hey then the tests should be improved. See my post at d...@qa ( http://qa.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=devmsgNo=11964 ). Our toolset for automated tests even reports all ok if the testttool correctly identified a stopper bug. Many other bugs cannot be found by the testtool (e.g. visual problems like issue 99662 ). I think, the benefits of automated testing are overstimated (or the costs are underestimated). Convwatch is a tool that does test visual problems quite nicely already. It loads a set of documents with a CWS and creates 'screenshots' ( postscript-printouts ). The same is done with the corresponding master on which the CWS is based upon. Then the 'screenshots' from the CWS are compared with the 'screenshots' from the master and it is detected automatically if the CWS would introduce visual changes. With this test and a good collection of test documents you can test a major part of the office automatically: 'load and display'. I would like to see a simple button within each CWS html frontend to start this test and a simple color indicator that says whether the test has been passed successfully. that now bite us, most of them have been found by users or testers *working* with the program. Adding more CWS test runs and so shortening the time for real-life testing will not help us but make things worse. I don't agree. Preventing the integration of bugs earlier in the production phase especially before the integration into the master trunk would give us much more freedom. Now we always need to react on show stoppers and react and react and uh then the release time line is on risk. All that, because the bugs are already in the product. If you instead detect the bugs before they are integrated into the product you can keep cool, refuse the bad CWS and thus not the release is on risk but only the single bad CWS. The point is *if* you detect the bugs in the CWS. At the moment we obviuosly do not identify enough critical issues while CWS testing (even if the mandatory tests are done). I assume you are talking about the VCL-Testtool-tests. But we have more tests - we have UNO-API-tests, we have performancetests and we have convwatch. And we have even much more VCL-Tests than those that are mandatory. So there is much room for improvement even without writing any new test. I am missing a stimulation for good behaviour in this plans. There are people who do the feature design, who do the developing work, who do the testing, who create the automatic test, who do the documetnation and after all these people have done their work and lets assume they have done it good and without show stoppers, after all this there comes someone else and says, oh no, I do not think that I want to have this for this release, there are other things that I want to have more and in the sum I guess that it might be to much for the next release? Where is the stimulation for good behaviour here? The problem is, that we first need to prove that good behaviour is really helpfull and prevents critical bugs in the master. I'm all for promoting good behaviour - and in most cases I would like to see more people who follow the rules (like publishing specs correctly at the specs website). Well so lets try convwatch as mandatory test for the next release to prove whether it helps. But we must be allowed to review our processes and identify the parts that are not so helpfull. Fully agreed. In addition it must be allowed to identify parts where helpful things are missing. There is none, instead it is a stimulation to push in the changes quickly into the product and skip careful testing. If this is some stimulation: thanks for all the chart specs that are correctly linked at the specs website. These are very helpfull to speed up testing, get an idea about the new functionality and in many cases arethe only resource to get our translations correct. Thanks André! ;-) . It is nice to hear that that part of the work has a real benefit. My idea is that the integration of a CWS could be and should be the gratification and stimulation for good behavior. Ingrid André - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
[dev] Re: [marketing] extending the OpenOffice BugBounty Programm
Hi Martin, all, The discussion following this initial mail, showed both good ideas and interest of few people to make it better than last year. I updated the wiki (see first link below) with the result of the discussion. Khirano and me were so brave to mention willingness to help. When we look for a planning starting end of April, we have some weeks to prepare. OTOH, I still have a bit the feeling that in the ideas, proposed materials, some items are still missing. So if you find something to be added, pls let us know or just do it. Thanks, Cor Martin Hollmichel wrote (6-2-2009 17:45) Hi, last year we initiated the bug bounty program (http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/BugBountyProgram and references below). Obviously we failed in spreading the information [...] http://www.mail-archive.com/annou...@openoffice.org/msg00145.html http://freelancefundraiser.wordpress.com/2008/11/10/openofficeorg-achieves-ten-million-downloads-at-the-end-of-its-beijing-conference/ -- Cor Nouws-nl.OpenOffice.org marketing contact = 2009 - Develop OOo = www.nieuwsteoffice.nl = - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
Re: [dev] About OOo digital signature OOoConf 2008.
Hi, I wrote a page at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Improving_The_Digital_Signature_Feature where I put together my view of how the signature framework could work. It is not clear when this is to be implemented and who would take of it. Joachim Giuseppe Castagno wrote: Hi all, the subject topic is the one presented at OOoConf 2008, e.g. this one: http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2008/programme/friday_abstracts.html#a1419 Are there any development in that area? I'm curious, since I'm restarting an extension project about digital signature I suspended some months ago. BeppeC. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
Re: [dev] Sections and appending documents
Hey, Now that the merging is working fine I seem to stumble upon a new question. How should I start unmerging the document, or actively rollback to the document state before the merge? Any idea's? At first I was thinking about closing the bean and its container and reloading the whole process from there, although it is way too time consuming. What doesn't work is just assigning a new Object to the bean, as the container keeps looking at the current one. Basically I should be able to clear the whole document and then use the same code as a merge, only with the first initial document as 2nd document for the merge. I'm just not sure where to start. Oh and where can I find all the URL's in string format listed? For example: serviceFactory.createInstance(com.sun.star.text.TextSection)); or .uno:Print ? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Sections-and-appending-documents-tp22312435p22661953.html Sent from the openoffice - dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
Re: [dev] About OOo digital signature OOoConf 2008.
Joachim Lingner - Sun Germany Software Engineer - ham02 - Hamburg escreveu: Hi, I wrote a page at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Improving_The_Digital_Signature_Feature where I put together my view of how the signature framework could work. It is not clear when this is to be implemented and who would take of it. Joachim Giuseppe Castagno wrote: Hi all, the subject topic is the one presented at OOoConf 2008, e.g. this one: http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2008/programme/friday_abstracts.html#a1419 Are there any development in that area? I'm curious, since I'm restarting an extension project about digital signature I suspended some months ago. BeppeC. http://homembit.com/2009/01/odf-12-digital-signature-support-will-be-compatible-with-icp-brazil.html -- Marco de Freitas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
[dev] MediaWiki *import* function ?
Hi, I immensily enjoy the MediaWiki export function, but in order to make it the perfect WYSIWIG MediaWiki editor, it would also need a MediaWiki *import* function. Is anything like that currently planned ? Regards, John Smith. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
