Re: Asking users to upstream
Alberto and list, On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella < es204904...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thomas Ward: > > At the point of checking if Upstream supports the version of the > > software, then perhaps give an advisory to upstream. > > So shall I add now that very same recommendation? > > Has this discussion generated any useful answer? I haven't been asked by Alberto to file upstream reports, but I have been recently asked to do so by Christopher Penalver in relation to bug 1444110; and I have done so; and he has handled the linking with Launchpad and the LibreOffice Bugzilla; and I have seen upstream reports coming back through Launchpad, though not everything going on on Bugzilla is making it back to Launchpad; and bug priority on Bugzilla has changed from high to highest. So based on my limited evidence this seems to be working, and it seems like a reasonable and decent sort of way to bring the bugs to the attention of the upstream maintainers. I recall a similar experience a few years back, but not the details. I get that filing an upstream bug request for an out of date, unsupported version is not especially useful, but finding out that such is the case seems potentially quite useful. -- Chris Hermansen · clhermansen "at" gmail "dot" com C'est ma façon de parler. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Asking users to upstream
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:43:55 +0200 Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Thomas Ward: > > (First character here is EMOJI - NonDisplay on Ubuntu + > > Thunderbird). We've had this discussion MANY times prior with you > > and on this list about using Emoji - don't. > > Okay, you are right. > > I promise I won't be posting emails with pictographs, at least while > Ubuntu LTS prints that horrible default character. And if the > situation changed, I would be asking for your permission before > posting them. Please simply do not use them. You are assuming that, because you use emojis, everybody else also does so. This is not true (myself included). My emails are text-only, not HTML, and no expectation of anything different. And we have to cater for *all*, not only those that use, and can receive, emojis in emails. There is a simple reason for that: text-only is the *common* base: every email client supports it. (Now, if I am texting, I will use emojis. No problems there.) > On the other hand it's very sad not being able to use visuals, as I > feel they bring plenty of dynamism when used adequately. See above. It is, perhaps sad (personally, I do not understand why). But it is certainly sadder when I receive an email with with them, and lose the desired meaning. > Perhaps string emoticons instead? (^_-) Yes, please. Again, all email clients will display emoticons. Cheers, ..C.. -- ab alio expectes alteri quod feceris pgpXesKOh93Rf.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Asking users to upstream
Thomas Ward: (First character here is EMOJI - NonDisplay on Ubuntu + Thunderbird). We've had this discussion MANY times prior with you and on this list about using Emoji - don't. Okay, you are right. I promise I won't be posting emails with pictographs, at least while Ubuntu LTS prints that horrible default character. And if the situation changed, I would be asking for your permission before posting them. On the other hand it's very sad not being able to use visuals, as I feel they bring plenty of dynamism when used adequately. Perhaps string emoticons instead? (^_-) Thomas Ward: > At the point of checking if Upstream supports the version of the > software, then perhaps give an advisory to upstream. So shall I add now that very same recommendation? -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
