Re: [Libreoffice-qa] what happened to Reiner?

[bfo]

Tommy wrote
 Retiered some time ago [can't find thread]. Very sad
 Ok, I was afraid that he left the project...
 anyway he did a very good job here and everybody will welcome him if he  
 comes back.

He did:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Role-of-the-QA-calls-tp4052308.html



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-what-happened-to-Reiner-tp4064927p4065008.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013

[bfo]

jmadero wrote
 One of the main issues is that FDO doesn't allow you to go from RESOLVED 
 - WORKSFORME back to UNCONFIRMED. 

Hi!
Not true. RESOLVED WORKSFORMEUNCONFIRMED transition is possible with
current fdo status workflow. Just checked that moment ago myself. See this
bug activity: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_activity.cgi?id=45941
Best regards.





--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Minutes-QA-Call-11-16-2012-tp4019790p403.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013

[bfo]

jmadero wrote
 If you mark a bug as WFM, you are unable to go directly back to
 UNCONFIRMED - which for me 
 is strange, I understand if it's marked as FIXED but WFM shouldn't block 
 you from doing UNCONFIRMED again.

Hi!
Are you sure about that? See this bug activity table:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_activity.cgi?id=46254.
WFMUNCONFIRMED transition there.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Minutes-QA-Call-11-16-2012-tp4019790p4030926.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-design] Send Feedback Option

[bfo]

Stefan Knorr (Astron)-2 wrote
 here's a link to an HTML mockup:
 http://dl.dropbox.com/u/87946285/libreoffice/feedback/feedback-page.html

Hi!
Did you think about setting up LibreOffice Feedback page using Mozilla
software? It's code is available at github:
https://github.com/mozilla/input.mozilla.org
Skin this, make links to other LO resources and you have a ready to go
system, quite important for any hot issues and quality in general.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-libreoffice-design-Send-Feedback-Option-tp4021508p4021626.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of the QA Call tomorrow, Tuesday 1300UTC

[bfo]

Sophie Gautier wrote
 I would propose to use QA Contact field for this purpose, at least when
 in
 the processing (translation, gathering more details) phase. 
 If it could be the qa@fr list, then it's ok.

Hi!
This have to be Bugzilla registered account. If there is one for qa@fr, then
it could be added.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-QA-Call-tomorrow-Tuesday-1300UTC-tp4014857p4016156.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of the QA Call tomorrow, Tuesday 1300UTC

[bfo]

Sophie Gautier wrote
 I've discussed the process with our FR team and they are ok to handle it.

Hi!
Great to hear that! All we need now is a list of people, by language, who
can be cc'ed to work on the bug
when it has non English summary and seems to be a valid report at first
sight.

Sophie Gautier wrote
 We have to make sure that the bug filled on BZ will be tagged as already
 managed by our team (nobody to search on duplicates again or tests on
 other OS, version etc.) and that they will marked as confirmed or even
 assigned to somebody.

I would propose to use QA Contact field for this purpose, at least when in
the processing (translation, gathering more details) phase. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-QA-Call-tomorrow-Tuesday-1300UTC-tp4014857p4015886.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Easy Hack Tracking System -- Developer Input Required

[bfo]

Hi!
Recently I stumbled upon two open source projects (sources are available on
github) to get more volunteers by their interests:
- in bugs department - see http://www.joshmatthews.net/bugsahoy/
- in the development area - see http://whatcanidoformozilla.org/
Those are very simple sites, where you can just pick up what is interesting
to you. You will receive bugs or more informations. Would be cool to discuss
implementing those. Maybe as Easy Hack even.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-New-Easy-Hack-Tracking-System-Developer-Input-Required-tp4013528p4014061.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LDTP now works for Linux, Win Mac

[bfo]

Thorsten Behrens wrote
 Hi there,
 seen this today -
 
 http://nagappanal.blogspot.de/2012/10/ann-automated-testing-on-mac-atomac-101.html
 Did anyone have experience (positive  negative) with that tool?
 Cheers,
 -- Thorsten

Hi.
See
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246.html
for some thoughts...
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-LDTP-now-works-for-Linux-Win-Mac-tp4013125p4013160.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 There is one already - Bugzilla. I think devs should be teached how to
 use
 Bugzilla more.
   :-) Sure - but a developer's daily interaction involves using many bug
 trackers - from LibreOffice, to SUSE, RedHat, Deb-bugs, Apache Issues,
 etc. having a single page that lets you get to them easily can be nice.
 
Hi.
This is another major problem... 

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   I agree that wiki pages don't help; but having a convenient developer
 default-page that makes it easy to get to the bugs you want - and also
 prompts you with the last 5x new regressions, and a competitive
 component vs. component bug chart and ... - might do some good. No doubt
 it could all be done in a pile of Javascript or something :-)
 
Anyway such dashboard could be done like this:
Sample screenshot -
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9753/bugzilladashboard.jpg
Tool -
http://toolness.github.com/bugzilla-dashboard/#username=[bugzilla.mozilla.org
username]
All this can be done using Bugzilla integrated APIs (or BzAPI
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:REST_API) with a help of some mediawiki
addons - nice examples:
http://christian.legnitto.com/blog/2012/04/18/new-mediawiki-bugzilla-feature/
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4002780.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap, some questions

[bfo]

Hi.
tl;dr, but IMHO ideal localized MozTrap system could be designed this way:
Tests should be written using some kind of special text editor with
autocomplete, in generic language (or based on English) using UI strings and
then those strings substituted to the language of choice (not only French).
The framework should be using .po files only.  How to achieve this? I don't
know. Maybe integrate with Pootle server or sync with LO sources? This would
allow to present UI strings in any language supported by LibreOffice. All
this seems like good candidate for GSOC project...
My 2 eurocents.
Best regards.
P.S.
Having multilanguage MozTrap can lead us to multilanguage reports in
Bugzilla... We do not want multilanguage Bugzilla, don't we? I already have
to use translator services in reports submitted by French or Spanish people.
Good to learn new languages, but... you know... time consuming while bugs
triage.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Moztrap-some-questions-tp4000922p4001926.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   Of course the filters are tested; there were -zero- unit tests for the
 RTF filter before we started, it is now perhaps -the- most unit tested
 filter that there is - every bug fix Miklos makes has a nice unit test:
 better - since the code is shared, that is unit testing a big chunk of
 the DOCX and perhaps DOC filtering as well.
 
Hi!
I noticed that, as I am forced to watch commits to know what is going on in
the projects. Good work, should be a part of commit workflow, but IMHO such
tests should be placed in the code before importing it to stable branch as a
general rule and good coding practice.

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   Wow - I didn't hear about that; can you give me a few links ? did you
 use a Windows build with debugging symbols (if not the traces would be
 next-to-useless sadly).
 
Sure. BTW: if you can make that this page will get a professional review -
that would be great.
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/How_to_get_a_backtrace_with_WinDbg

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 Unfortunately there are problems, the Windows symbol
 server is IIRC some hideous tangled Microsoft proprietary product that
 requires a Windows server to push a few binary files (que?). This
 complicates matters.
 
As you can read in the bug resources I gathered Mozilla guys did it, along
with Bug reporting stuff. Whoever is working on it can ask those friedly
people for help. One should not reinvent the wheel again and again...

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
   
 Is there a good list of such bugs ?
 AFAICS we need a good way to get nice work (like your bugs with
 backtraces) communicated to development in such a way that they notice 
 do something about it :-) Not sure how to do that - bloating the MAB
 list is prolly not it though - creative ideas appreciated.
 
We should be using Bugzilla and its features - keywords, shared searches,
tags, custom fields, flags (per component maybe). 

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
   
   One thing I'd like to do is make a developers' portal - we can use as a
 homepage, with easy-to-use boxes to lookup bug numbers, and interesting
 reports on the page: that might be rather a good way of advertising the
 latest problems :-)
 
There is one already - Bugzilla. I think devs should be teached how to use
Bugzilla more. It is a monster at first sight, but it can be your best pet
after a while. Creating multiple resources, like devs portals, special wiki
pages etc. won't help.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001184.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   The reason I graph regressions each week is to try to add focus there;
 if you can think of another more encouraging way - that'd be
 appreciated.
 
Hi.
Unfortunately those graphs are discouraging in many ways. Especially if one
thinks about upgrading LO...

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 We (the ESC) made a strategic
 decision to take some regressions there - in order to have much greater
 sharing of the filter code, such that we have less code, and hence our
 bug fixes have more impact across all Microsoft import and export
 filters. 
 
Does QA OKeyed this decision? What QA actions were taken before such move?
Regression tests prepared? Any tests in general? Manual tests?

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 There is testing before committing. 
 
Tests as regression tests or tests as is it green on tinderbox or it builds
on commiter's computer?

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 One strategic thing we -badly- need is the ability to get stack traces
 with full symbols out of QA. With
 that information we can double or better the productivity of bug fixing
 - without it we are half-blind.
 
I am starting to doubt that it helps. I recently delivered Windows bt to
most crash bugs I could find. Prepared wiki page about it. Asked for review
of that page. Silence. Few of the bugs were fixed, without any comment if my
bt was useful. Will keep this work, but I don't see that bugs with bts are
fixed quicker.
 
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 Fridrich has been working on getting stack traces / symbol servers
 setup for Windows for the last several months; he is currently on
 vacation - no doubt he'll give an update on that when he gets back. It
 is an enduring frustration to me to be missing that piece.
 
I think I put few cents for this myself on ML and trying to gather nice
resources in bug https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50350. Someone
is working on it? Great. It is still UNCONFIRMED...
 
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 It's really not clear to me what you're looking for: surely you're not
 asking for the whole project to stop working on features, and focus
 exclusively on bugs for a year ;-) that seems an unrealistic expectation
 to me - we have to move forward as well as fix our huge legacy of bugs,
 as well as the new bugs we create. 
 
I would be happy if I achieve the change in base workflow - new feature in
the codebase? Splendid! But unit tests, testcases and manual testing done
before commiting. QA OKeyed the feature? Then you can commit.
Focusing exclusively on bugs in one of next release (be it 3.7 or 3.8) would
be a great idea, as please remember - a feature is a no go, when there are
still 123bugs (123bugs as one, two, three actions needed to get LO crash).
Also, if I understand correctly, from 3.7 there will be a possibility to
introduce working patches from a sister project. It would be great to bury
the hatchet and improve both kids at once. 
Best regards.





--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001009.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] top #n bugs tracking ...

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   So - I like the idea of highlighting a small set of the most critical
 bugs each-week - say five; and having them linked in the ESC minutes
 with a small write-up. Of course that would need to be generated by QA.
   The bit that is unworkable in the above is the problem of starting QA
 in earnest only at RC1 :-) That is is -way- too late. We have to be
 doing QA on master, Betas etc.
 [...]
   Why is RC1 -way- too late ? The time it takes to get a fix made,
 tested, reviewed and included into the next RC is sufficiently long that
 being certain that bugs fixed in RC1 are truly fixed without knock-on
 regressions by the time we hit RC3 is already not optimal.
 
Hi.
In my proposal I was thinking about maintenance releases only. Constant QA
on master, Betas I am taking for granted. So, proposed workflow would be
like this (based on 3.6.1 and 3.6.2):
3.6.1 release 
at RC1  Week 33, Aug 13 - Aug 19, 2012 - start of nominations of bugs, which
should be fixed in 3.6.2 
at RC2  Week 34, Aug 20 - Aug 26, 2012  - list ready, reviewed by QA, picked
minimum number of bugs - maybe goal of 5-10 bugs  per release will be
achievable? interested devs can assign the bugs to themselves
3.6.2 release
Hard code freeze  branch libreoffice-3-6-2 Week 38, Sep 17 - Sep 23, 2012
- bugs from nomination list VERIFIED FIXED
at RC1  Week 38, Sep 17 - Sep 23, 2012  - list empty or number of bugs 
minimum goal - nomination is started


This is of course apart from all other bug fixing and QA activity. Details
to be discussed.


Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   On the other hand, getting some top #5 bugs chewed over at the ESC call
 each week from Beta0 onwards sounds like it would be a worthwhile thing
 to do. Of course, there is no guarantee they get fixed and this data
 should already existing in the MAB tracker for the next release - but it
 might be helpful to get wider exposure.
 
Would be happy to see that going on... Please remember that old bugs are
mostly in the master anyway.

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
   Are you volunteering to write that ? if so, the ESC agenda goes out
 tomorrow ;-)
 
I know that there is propose=do it scheme on this ML and it is rude to have
excuses but at the moment I want to dedicate myself to bugs triage... 
Backlog it this area is enormous. 
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001017.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Jochen wrote
 
 We need a strategy with a positive, encouraging motto for the developers.
 
Hi.
Strategy is simple - the time has come to manage bugs better. I could be
mistaken, it is still difficult to me to gather informations from all LO
resources, but I think that today some QA people are CCing experts asking
for a bug fix.
I am in doubt that this works. Some kind of Bugfix campaign has to start. 
Mottos? I am not a marketing expert nor a good gfx artist to prepare
posters, but we could use some catchy slogans on wiki pages or mailing to
get devs more involved in fixing them. As probably you noticed, I mention
Mozilla very, very often in my postings. Well, they have good ideas. Make
awful mistakes and have their problems (recent Firefox and Flash situation)
but are IMHO better organized and have a big bunch of tooling. Yes, I am
aware that Mozilla have their QA full time employees, but dedicated
volunteers are not unique. At MozCamp Europe 2011 held in Berlin a campaign
for Firefox Mobile testers was present all around the venue
(https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/Testdrivers_Program). Posters
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/lhirlimann/6375704453/), stickers were
everywhere. I think that LO conference in Berlin is a good opportunity to
have Bug squashing draft (this include devs and QA). Examples? I paraphrased
few well known slogans to sell this idea (posters, stickers, t-shirts?):

Bugs - everyone loses. Help to fix them.
Volunteers wanted! Call 999-FIX-BUGS now!
Became The king of bugfixing!
The bugfixer 14 - come to the sourcecode soon!
100% certified bugfixer
We find bugs 
We fix bugs
If you want to impress someone, show him your bugfix list
Fix bugs, live better!
For the men in charge of bugfixing
Bugfixing. I'm lovin it. (R)
Bugfixing. Just do it (R)
Bugfixing. F* good and tasty!
Bugfixing. Does she?
Bugfixing. Does he?
Bugfixing. Are you?
I am with bugfixer
I fix, 'cause I can
Fix it your way!
Reach out and fix something.
Find it. Assign it. Fix it.
Keep going and going and going...
I'm in Resolved Fixed Team.
Have you fixed your bug today?
Are you Resolved Fixed?

Call for bugs (CFB).
I think that CFB should be introduced in the release schedule (example
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/3.6). When to do it and how
is another matter. I think that when RC1 is released a CFB should be started
and bugfixing planned when RC2 is released (2 weeks are enough?). Bugs
should be nominated by QA from ESC stats - regressions and MAB list. Hard
code freeze is in next 4 weeks, so the question is - how many bugs can be
fixed in 4 weeks? Please remember that today we are talking about 70 MABs
and 170 regressions.  Branch is in 6 months cycle. So, 10 bugs a week will
be enough.. not. Please remember that we still have 2500 bugs to triage.
Some minimum should be set by ESC as a goal. Even the open source community
have to be managed.

To motivate volunteers TDF could join (surprise surprise) Mozilla initiative
of Open Badges system (http://www.openbadges.org/en-US/
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Badges/About http://planet.openbadges.org/). Some
LibreOffice badges could be developed, like:
- certified LibreOffice user
- c. LO developer (builder, gerriter)
- c. LO supporter (educator, implementer, translator, templates)
- c. QA member (tester, triager, test wrtiter, researcher, bibisecter,
moztraper)
This can help to build active community and make people proud. Requirements
for above should be set.
(http://ask.libreoffice.org have their badges - does it work?)

All in all the backlog in bugs, regressions and crashers need urgent
attention and detailed plan how to get things done. The sooner, the better.
When bugs/regressions/crasher situation will be under control, QA could let
the devs to rewrite everything. Of course only when testplans, automation
and proper code testing procedures are implemented. But that is another
matter which should be discussed.

Best regards.
P.S.
Other issues to discuss:
- central crash report data system - enable build in crash reporter - detect
hot issues
- http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FindTheExpert - experts involvement in
CFB
- does releasing branch starter with known dataloss regressions (already
fixed!) makes sense?
- 4 weeks cycle - not too often for proper testing, bug fixing? 
- beta, rc, master users (numbers, reports)




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000667.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: 

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Jochen wrote
 
 IMHO has bfo some right. But:
 1) bankruptcy of this system is a little bit exaggerated.
 
Hi!
Not at all. After reviewing 400 bugs (and counting) I could double 3.5MAB
numbers in an instant. 
The main problem is that MAB is a battlefield for users without QA control
and devs IMHO are in other parts of the LO world (and nobody, I say nobody
will ever browse 300 comments bug). Just see 3.5MAB stats in ESC minutes -
open bugs vs fixed ratio is unfortunately more or less constant.
The same with regressions. 67 in Writer? 177 in whole package? Regressions!
Bugs that irritate users most, because they want to use advertised nice new
features but they are stuck with old version for good. Does the project do
not respect users? One can see it that way... And all that with
double/triple code reviews. A joke!
Other problem is bugs backlog. 1000 of UNCONFIRMED or NEEDINFO, 2500 NEW
bugs! With a rate of ~6 bugs closed daily it is not very encouraging (please
remember that some of them are WORKSFORME, INVALID or DUPLICATE bugs). QA
should push red button instantly.
Luckily there are people who want to triage bugs (including myself). But
with those numbers it is a daunting task. Do not forget that after triage we
need a lot of people who want to fix them. 
And to get things worse we are talking here about bugs.freedesktop.org only!
There are other Bugzillas where LO bugs are reported (including AOO sister
code). Herculean effort is needed at once to get this straight.
As you can see there are major topics to discuss urgently. I hope together
we can change this situation.
And yes, bugs.freedesktop.org Product:LibreOffice is in a state of
bankruptcy... Numbers do not lie
(https://bugs.freedesktop.org/reports.cgi?product=LibreOfficedatasets=UNCONFIRMEDdatasets=NEWdatasets=NEEDINFO).


Jochen wrote
 
 2) Whinging and grouching will not help
 We need a strategy with a positive, encouraging motto for the developers.
 
Well, somebody has to start it. I observe this project for few months and I
think, that QA voice is weak. I am perplexed reading All good, No
problems in ESC QA section and then read regression or MAB stats. Also
while triaging bugs, see a few 123crash bugs a week or such discoveries as
bug 47466. I will whinge and grouch even more - LO is most crashy
application I ever touched in my life. This has to change. QA has to step
in. No more changing of splash screens (a lot of problems with that and
still bottom text is cutted) or rewriting filters just to introduce 12
regressions. It has to stop. Really. Now.
Crashkill, regressionkill, testing before commiting, better code reviews.
Insist that code rewrite planned for 4.0 is absurd, when there are dozens of
instant crashes in the codebase. Unfortunately devs do not like to fix bugs.
That is why I think a strategy should be to nominate bugs for every
maintenance release. 10 bugs per release? Ask the people - please, fix those
bugs first and then innovate. I can't see that on daily basis, only when
some disaster happens like recent regressions or problems with Windows
builds or a real real real hard blocker.

On the other way - paid support as a first answer for bug fixing is a
deadend. Corporate users can count their assets. They are tempted by free
software and they expect it just works (interoperates with their customers).
When they hear, that paid support is suggested, they start to count very
fast. What is better - pay every year 10/50/100$ per user for a support or
buy (or lease) other software and it just works with everyone/everything? Or
maybe they do not need a software at all with cloud computing here, there
and everywhere? It is very tricky situation for software in general...

That is all for today. Hope to see some ideas in ESC minutes some day and
more QA volunteers. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000474.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
 
 For some of these bugs simply the Bug description still is not 
 satisfying so that I can understand developers that they pick bugs where 
 they can start fixing with out much additional preliminary research. 
 
Hi!
Sometimes I am not even sure that devs use Bugzilla and read comments...
Anyway they can use NEEDINFO status with a short comment and skip the bug or
maybe qawanted keyword for such research request should be introduced. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000483.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
 
 I dont think discussing this on a mailing list will help us find the
 silver
 bullet to the problems you describe. However, you are most invited to just
 us
 on the next QA Call on August, 23rd 2012 1400UTC, discussing these topics
 on
 the phone is usually a lot more constructive.
 
Hi.
Thanks. I am not available in the working hours and really prefer text than
voice. Everyone can comment and brainstorm here.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000495.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Timur_LOL wrote
 
 It is clear that at the beginning bugs list should contain only bugs
 which are *new* in LibreOffice 3.6, but at some time, while some fixes
 from MAB 3.5 are integrated in the code, there is a decision on what
 to do with the remaining unfixed bugs from a branch (3.5).
 
Hi.
It is not a big surprise that 3.5MAB has already 3.4MAB bugs imported. Now,
most of them will become 3.6MAB, which is ridiculous. Personally I would
declare bankruptcy of this system. It is a road to nowhere. I'd propose
Nominate bug system. As branch will have 6 maintenance releases maybe a bug
should have Target version field, where QA would like to see a fix. I know
that LO development is Take your bugFix itCommit system, but
NominateTakeFixCommit attitude would be a gain. What good are new
features, where people are stuck with 3.4.x version because of regressions
introduced in constant rewrite of filters without proper testing? Already
there are discussions about LO 4.0 with incompatible changes. With all due
respect this is insane. I would like to see 3.8 crashkill and 3.9
regressionkill versions before rewriting code in 4.0 (with strict unit tests
and regression testing policies). I know that developers do not like to fix
bugs (bring), but QA should encourage to fix old problems, even at the
cost of new features (new features are cool!!!).



 Most annoying bugs:
 - Report wizard Finish button does nothing
 - Exporting files with hyperlinks in footnotes/endnotes or even a table of
 content to DOCX was generating corrupted files that other office suites
 weren't able to open
 - Exporting (saving) spreadsheet file with cell comments to XLS/XLSX will
 lose comments
 
Well, because of that (and 3.5MAB) 3.6  is a no go for many, in fact 3.5 in
no go for some already. Interesting read is an article about LO adoption in
France
(https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/mimo-working-group-french-ministries-certify-libreoffice-release-0)
where MIMO group recommends LibreOffice in 3.3.4 version until September
2012! I am curious which version will be recommended afterwards. They are
two branches behind already. Maybe their testing procedures would be good
test plans for LO testing in general? Does TDF cooperates with them about
it? Their deployment is mentioned in every marketing note recently...
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000297.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of ESC call ...

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
 
 * QA update (Rainer)
   + new bug report page - with search for duplicates thanks to Tollef
 
Hi.
Nice that Potential Duplicates has been enabled, the same for usernames
autocomplete. Whining could be enabled also. Maybe bugs.freedesktop.org
administrators are going toward Bugzilla 4.2. Hope so...
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-minutes-of-ESC-call-tp3999026p3999075.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Freedesktop down ??

[bfo]

Florian Reisinger wrote
 
 Somehow it seems to me that Bugzilla is down (With some circumstances 
 only...) http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/862641-81201261840PM
 
Hi.
Seems it is updated to 4.0.7 now and blazing fast atm...
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Freedesktop-down-tp3998811p3998817.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice code coverage

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

julien2412 wrote
 
 There's a tracker about coverage, see
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38840
 For the moment, no one seemed to be on it (perhaps I'm wrong).
 
Hi.
What a discovery! I have found some scripts already in the codebase
http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sal/qa/helper/gcov/. Maybe someone
with Linux build environment could check that out and try to generate some
stats. 
Best regards.



___
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-code-coverage-tp3994901p3998038.html

To unsubscribe from LibreOffice code coverage, visit 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_codenode=3994901code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTQ5MDF8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] Interoperability of LibreOffice and Microsoft Office 2013

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

Hi.
Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2013 Preview Evaluation is available for
download as MSI installer at 
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-US/evalcenter/hh973391.aspx?wt.mc_id=TEC_114_1_5
(link at the bottom of the page). Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows Server 2008
R2 or Windows Server 2012 required. Both 32bit and 64bit versions are
available. It is good opportunity to know what new features will be
available in this package and test interoperability with LibreOffice.
Product page is available at http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/en.
Best regards.






__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interoperability-of-LibreOffice-and-Microsoft-Office-2013-tp3996056.html
This email was sent by bfo (via Nabble)
To receive all replies by email, subscribe to this discussion: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=subscribe_by_codenode=3996056code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTYwNTZ8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice code coverage

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

Hi.
Today I stumbled upon Thunderbird code coverage report
(http://people.mozilla.org/~jcranmer2/c-ccov/).
Did anyone make such report for LibreOffice codebase? 
Best regards.



__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-code-coverage-tp3994901.html
This email was sent by bfo (via Nabble)
To receive all replies by email, subscribe to this discussion: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=subscribe_by_codenode=3994901code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTQ5MDF8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug transfer from AOOo Bugzilla to LibO Bugzilla

[bfo]

Hi.
In regards to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51352#c3
I think that imported bugs which are in RESOLVED FIXED state should get some
kind of notification by a triagger.
LO devs, with the current backlog, should not waste time for bugs, which
are already fixed in the other codebase.
According to
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Including-a-patch-from-AOO-tp3992463p3992646.html
such import will be possible in near future, so bugs indicated by such
notification could be proceed ASAP (possibly as EasyHack or Import Day).
Query based on See also field is no good, as there are many bugs reported
that are not fixed in AOO.
Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Bug-transfer-from-AOOo-Bugzilla-to-LibO-Bugzilla-tp3986722p3992866.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Cobra - WinLDTP Automation

[bfo]

Michael Stahl-2 wrote
 
 Linux version is LDTP, Windows version is Cobra and Mac version is PyATOM
 (Work in progress). 
 can all of these execute the same tests?
 surely writing tests 3 times is not the way to go.
 
With LDTP and WinLDTP, the script API part will be the same. The only
places where the script writer has to update things would be like - when the
widget types between both the platforms are different or the UI object label
is different
More informations:
news article -
http://news.efytimes.com/e1/82073/VMWare-Open-Sources--Windows-Version-Of-Linux-Desktop-Testing-Project
developer's blog - http://nagappanal.blogspot.com/



 i wonder what AOO uses for UI testing; perhaps IBM has some internal
 thing for that.
 
I have found the following resources:
https://cwiki.apache.org/OOOUSERS/release-qa-plan.html
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
http://www.mail-archive.com/ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg20994.html



 the smoketest (as well as many other automated tests) can be run during
 the build simply by calling make check, and i would hope that our
 release builds are built that way.
 
Are results of such tests available anywhere?



 - full regression test has to be done before every major release
 - basic regression test should be done also before every bug fix release 
 What is the status of those? Are they executed before each release? Any
 dashboards available?
 i wonder what regression test means here? manual tests, or does it
 refer to testtool?
 
I got it from this article:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Regression_Tests


--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246p3992538.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] Cobra - WinLDTP Automation

[bfo]

Hi.
 I stumbled upon Cobra – WinLDTP,  Windows version of Linux Desktop Testing
Project open sourced by VMWare
recently. Using this tool, the GUI functionality of an application can be
tested in Windows XP SP3, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8 development release.
Libre/OpenOffice is mentioned. Did anybody used LDTP in the past to perform
functional, regression testing? More info at
http://ldtp.freedesktop.org/wiki.
Best regards.
P.S.
There are traces of automation at wiki.documentfoundation.org:
- smoketest has to be done before any beta or rc build is announced
- full regression test has to be done before every major release
- basic regression test should be done also before every bug fix release 
What is the status of those? Are they executed before each release? Any
dashboards available?



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]

[bfo]

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
 
 Crash counter (search for libreoffice-core):
  https://errors.ubuntu.com/
 Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by most affected users:
 Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by bug heat:
 

This s very cool. Question - why I have mostly page not find errors when I
click in the Bugs report column
for libreoffice-core?

Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-crasher-bugs-and-most-annoying-bugs-generated-by-automation-was-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug--tp3987469p3988080.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/