[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
In news:j3ap2n$4u8$1...@dough.gmane.org, Alexander Thurgood alex.thurg...@gmail.com typed: Le 26/08/11 19:14, Twayne a icrit : Hi Twayne, But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Oh bugs do get fixed, just not necessarily the ones that any given (sub)set of users might want fixing. An example : Base bugs - of the more than one hundred Base bugs declared on bugzilla since the inception of LibreOffice, ... Alex, Hope this gets to you; I've never had a lot of luck with responses to the List (I read gmane's NNTP). ANYway, I don't disagree with anything you said, but figured it wouldn't hurt to voice my opinions. Writer is what I use most right now and yeah, I've seen stats on Base but I'm a one at a time kind of person G. Although I still think there is more that could be done I don't see any dead horses around, so my stick is still put away. From my vewpoint though, there needs to be a stop point where Writer et al are brought up to the point where 90%+ of the users can have a relatively bug-free environment and minimum, work-arounds pointed out for those that can't yet be fixed, for whatever reason. It would save exasperation on the part of your users and put a draw to the product that hasn't yet been seen. As an example, I don't believe it's a product that's ready for prime time at colleges or most businesses right now. I know of two around here who tried to implement LO and previously an OOo. They have since tossed it out and gone back to WP and MS respectively. A third one I know of is OK so far and not having any problems because they arean't asking it to do much more than secretarial jobs. That's only an experience of 3, but when you consider it, t must translate to many more. I only know this because I have business dealings with those three places. I might sound pretty negatve, but I want LO to become big time and I don't see how that can happen. Thanks for listening! Twayne` -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
In news:j39a1l$oeo$1...@dough.gmane.org, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net typed: On 08/26/2011 10:14 AM, Twayne wrote: In news:4e577895.1020...@krackedpress.com, ... As for releasing software with bugs, this is normal, even with MS products. But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Many bugs are found in real world testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are reported, they are placed on some type of bug needing to be fixed list. According to Alexander, no, that's not so. Again, see his post to me. Devs only want to write new code, not fix code, apparently not even their own. On the OOo releases list you could nominate a bug as a 'blocker' on the list. LO doesn't have the same (that I'm aware of), but they do have a 'most annoying bug' bug report for releases going forward. As far as I can tell anyone can add to that bug report with their own bug report addition. See: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 [LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs] quote from first comment This is the Meta issue to track most annoying bugs for the release of LibreOffice 3.5.x releases. It helps developers to concentrate on bugs that are important for users. Also it helps users to be aware of potential problems. If anyone wants to raise an Bug for the release, please add the Bug ID as dependent Bug here to the Meta Bug in field Depends on. Additionally please leave a comment here why you think that the bug should be privileged. See also http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria and http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan /quote from first comment So if you've a particular bug that you'd like to see fixed add it there... of course after first reading: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria That does include information on blockers, but I've not found any wiki pages on 'most annoying bug' criteria (yet). So I reckon that until someone defines the MAB criteria, add your MAB to 37361. ... Thanks, Noop; I'll look into that tomorrow. Twayne` -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
Le 26/08/11 19:14, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Oh bugs do get fixed, just not necessarily the ones that any given (sub)set of users might want fixing. An example : Base bugs - of the more than one hundred Base bugs declared on bugzilla since the inception of LibreOffice, only a very few have actually been fixed. The reasons for this are multiple, but nonetheless the reality is there. As for the longstanding OOo bugs, well like I said, a developer might decide to try and fix one or the other because he/she has encountered its annoying behaviour and is so hacked off about it that he/she decides to try and sort it out. According to Alexander, no, that's not so. Again, see his post to me. Devs only want to write new code, not fix code, apparently not even their own. Yes and no. It is more motivating to develop one's own code/features, than to fix other people's bugs, especially ones where the origins of the bug's birth may be obscur or go back to a time where programming decisions or decision rationale was poorly documented. As for fixing their own bugs, usually I would say that most of the devs on this project actually take pride in doing so. However, the bugs you seemed to be referring to as I understood it are ones that occurred during Sun/Oracle OOo stewardship. Who is to know whence those bugs came, Sun kept a very tight lid on outside submissions, refusing quite a few from other contributing bodies, going so far as to even write replacement code for that previously submitted by others to be in line with its stewardship policy of the moment. When a final release is targeted to go public, a list of stopper bugs is drawn up in the hope that some will be easy to fix and thereby cleared up rapidly. This is often the case with bugs introduced during development since the inception of LibreOffice. However, where some of the bugs are very old, the investment needed to correct them is often perceived as greater than the benefit to be obtained, in fact greater even than rewriting the whole corresponding code module. As such large rewrites are more future oriented than bug catch-up, it is normal then for such bugs to be placed on standby, pending further new development. I might not like that any more than you (especially with respect to Base in my particular case), but I can understand it from both a human motivation and ressource allocation point of view. Alex -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
Le 26/08/11 18:55, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, Thanks for the comeback. Please try to read this with the understanding that every word is meant to be positive and assstive to the LO project. I apprecate your come-back and don't expect a reply but if you wish to, feel free. I'm simply tryng to indicate the other side of the coin and I don't believe I'm alone in this. LO is in danger of going the same route as OOo did. I'm at times a very open critic of the project myself. My comments are in no way to denigrate any one in the development area specifically but one of the high hopes I had for LO was a very early-on promise from TDF/the LO grroup that such things wouldn't be tolerated in LO. Yes, I think initial marketing spin when the project started made users of OOo who switched to LO have very high expectations - some of which have clearly not been met IMO. I like that the envelope issues were sort of taken care of by including templates for the most popular envelope sizes, but it's still several trips around Hogan's Barn if the templates one needs don't exist and if the center/left/right position of text for the addressee doesn't match what the prnter wants, it's still using oddball dimensonal references instead of simply a dimension from the top left side of the envelope. Agreed, it is worse on Mac OSX, where within LO certain printer options are crippled, making printing envelopes and anything bar a normal letter like jumping through rings of fire. And though I haven't looked on 3.4, having to set BOTH printer AND program paper sizes shouldn't be a requirement, ever. I only know of a few different hi-end processors, but none of them require touchng the printer paper size Settings. But I have learned to work out the how-to for envelopes should I need to, so t's not a huge issue to me personally, more like a big annoyance and time-waster. Others though ... Agreed. The above and at least 6 more have been in OOo and continued on into LO without beiing fixed. Do you REALLY feel it's unfair to expect those things to have been fixed? Not at all. I started going through the envelope bug issues the other day checking to see what I could or could not reproduce. Like I said above, print options within LO on Mac are somewhat limited compared to other platforms it seems, so that makes testing/reproducing for me nigh on impossible. Has there ever been a CALL for anyone to the dev masses to dig into these things? LO is an excellent program but it's stuck in the 80-20% rule; and that 20% makes it impossible for me to drop Word for the large files. Not good: I lose not only the ability to do away with Word or WP but I can't make LO a production-use app because of those things. Which I perfectly understand, and as a pragmatic business user myself, I still recommend OOo 3.2.1 for many things because the progress that has been made in LO does not yet outweigh in my eyes the perceived or real disadvantages and bugs that existed in OOo 3.2.1 (mailmerge being one of them). I think I understand how the project functions but of course have no experience in same. The real problem is, LO does not do what it says/implies/menus it can do and still has OOo bugs in it. Yes, I would agree partially - but then, with a truly free, open source project, you can not make anyone do anything. Ultimately, as you say, it will be a law of the jungle thing. If too many niche circumstance users drop the product, then LO will shrink to be just another close runner up to Word/Excel/Powerpoint, along with KOffice, Calligra and all the other wannabes. But again, has a CALL ever gone out for people to work on the old bugs? Of course and some of them do get fixed, eventually. Like the ones that carried over from OOo? Doesn't anyone realize that the project cannot actually become a leader in the processor industry while it has those and other bugs? There is a tendency within the developer community to admit the phenomenon known as bit-rot over time (which personally I find rather worrying), and that the effort fixing an old bug may not be worth it when a whole new module of code could be developed that would also deal with the underlying problems having caused the old bug in the first place. However, the new code development will only take place in the future as and when resources can be made available. Catch 22 :-/ You seem to be saying that volunteers will write the original code but then won't stand behind it when parts of it don't function properly or at all. I WANT LO to succeed, but it cannot while such bugs are ignored and figured instead to be good enough for government work. No that is not what I said, or at least not what I meant. Within the framework of LibreOffice, most developers who create bugs through their own coding efforts take pride in fixing the bugs they cause too. Bear in mind however, that the
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
On 08/27/2011 06:48 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: . However, where some of the bugs are very old, the investment needed to correct them is often perceived as greater than the benefit to be obtained, in fact greater even than rewriting the whole corresponding code module. As such large rewrites are more future oriented than bug catch-up, it is normal then for such bugs to be placed on standby, pending further new development. I might not like that any more than you (especially with respect to Base in my particular case), but I can understand it from both a human motivation and ressource allocation point of view. If Ford did to automobiles what you suggest is proper conduct for software development, Ford would be out of business. If during the normal course of using a product (Ford car), the brake pedal would periodically fall off for no apparent reason, consumers would be outraged, Ford would put a team on it and it would get corrected. I'm certain of it. I and many other people use OO/LO and periodically get file corruption rendering the document useless. I'd say that's roughly the equivalent of the brakes falling off a car. I've reported this for years and corruption issues persist with identical symptoms from one release to the next, from OO to LO. I can understand your position for nuisance items, but file corruption is the software having a brain aneurysm. It needs emergency attention right NOW. I'm a professional software developer (mainframes PC's) and I've managed software teams to produce products sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars per copy. The market incentive to produce a reliable product is what is missing in open source. No ones butt is on the line - no accountability. As the old saying goes, Lead, follow or get out of the way. LO has positioned itself as an alternative office suite. It has an obligation to produce a reliable product. Period. If that can't be achieved year after year, then the management of that project, or lack of it is at fault. Stop writing code. Get the project organized, possibly even create a branch for profit, and get on with it or get out of the way. -- Bill Gradwohl Roatan, Honduras -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. I fear you might have misunderstood how this project functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when someone decides that their itch to scratch is really starting to annoy them. The developers working as employees of some of the software companies involved in the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt they have their own internal work pressures and priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix and why that particular bug should trump all others, in that case, they might as well go and develop something else. The fact of the matter is that there are still too few developers to be able to maintain the massive beast of code which LibreOffice represents. Add to that the fact that an even smaller number really know anything about the code base and how it works as a whole (i.e. where poking one thing causes the butterfly to explode on your screen 50,000 miles away). If you can live with the way the project functions, then you can live with the bugs. If not, then from a pragmatic point of view you can either do it yourself, pay someone to do it for you, or else come back to the project in a few months/years time to see if things have moved on in the direction you want. Alex -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
Hi :) My answer is to keep whichever product you were using previously. Just don't bother to upgrade it. Updates are a good idea but paying for a full upgrade is unnecessary. That way you can use LibreOffice most of the time but still go back to your old one for bitsbobs. Regards from Tom :) From: Alexander Thurgood alex.thurg...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Fri, 26 August, 2011 7:16:53 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. I fear you might have misunderstood how this project functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when someone decides that their itch to scratch is really starting to annoy them. The developers working as employees of some of the software companies involved in the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt they have their own internal work pressures and priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix and why that particular bug should trump all others, in that case, they might as well go and develop something else. The fact of the matter is that there are still too few developers to be able to maintain the massive beast of code which LibreOffice represents. Add to that the fact that an even smaller number really know anything about the code base and how it works as a whole (i.e. where poking one thing causes the butterfly to explode on your screen 50,000 miles away). If you can live with the way the project functions, then you can live with the bugs. If not, then from a pragmatic point of view you can either do it yourself, pay someone to do it for you, or else come back to the project in a few months/years time to see if things have moved on in the direction you want. Alex -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
Question: Which version of LibreOffice are you using? 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2? Many issues/bugs have been fixed in the 3.4.x line that has not yet been fixed in the 3.3.x line. 3.4.x reads MS formats better, is one of the fixes in that line. I kissed MSO completely on Feb. 2010 when I choose Ubuntu as my OS on my new desktop. Then when LibreOffice came out I kissed OpenOffice.org goodbye. I had been using MSO since Office 95 or 97, with the last one Office 2003. As for releasing software with bugs, this is normal, even with MS products. Many bugs are found in real world testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are reported, they are placed on some type of bug needing to be fixed list. Then it is up to the individuals who do the programming/developing [all volunteers] to choose which bug they have the skills to fix. I was a mainframe programmer. I was really good. I am not skilled in the programming needed for developing/fixing code for LibreOffice. We all hope that the next release has the bug fixed that causes problems for some groups of users. Each release does its best to have as many issues fixed as it can with the fixed release schedule. With a fixed release schedule, it give the developers/helpers/bug-fixers a time line to do the work. Some bugs takes a long time to find the code that is the problem. I was once told that the code base for LibreOffice [and OpenOffice.org] is 100's of thousands of lines of code. Some are no longer used, while some are in need of cleaning up. The LibreOffice developers took OpenOffice.org's open source code base and dedicated themselves to cleaning up all the messy and bad coding that was in the OOo code base. They did a lot of that and made improvements and more functions/abilities in their 3.3.0 release and came out with it before Oracle's people came out with OOo's 3.3.0 package. Plus, the tech-media stated that LibreOffice was a better product from the volunteers for The Documents Foundation/ LibreOffice than was put out by the paid employees [and some volunteers] at Oracle. To be honest, I was told that many of the bugs that are annoying LibreOffice users can be traced back to the original messed up core coding and the fixes placed on top of that coding to make it work, instead of fixing that core code that is not working correctly. That is some of the hardest work for our volunteeers, to trace and fix the core coding that should have been fixed long time ago when it was developed during the time Sun Microsystems owned the OpenOffice brand. Our developers are all volunteers and they are doing the best that they can. If Sun, and then Oracle, paid employees working 8 hours a day 5 days a week was working on developing/fixing/improving the OpenOffice.org product and did not do as good of a job putting out the 3.3.0 version of OOo as was put out with the all volunteer package of LibreOffice, we have to give our people a hand for all that they did to make LO better than OOo. Our volunteers are doing the best job as possible for volunteers and their limited amount of time after they come home from their paid jobs. They deserve out thanks for their dedication to making LibreOffice the best they can make it with the limits to their time to do the work. Sorry for the band standing, but our volunteers are doing everything they are able to do to make LibreOffice the best free MSO alternative office package. On 08/26/2011 02:16 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. I fear you might have misunderstood how this project functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when someone decides that their itch to scratch is really starting to annoy them. The developers working as employees of some of the software companies involved in the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt they have their own internal work pressures and priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix and why that particular bug should trump all others, in that case, they might as well go and develop something else. The fact of the matter is that there are still too few developers to be able to maintain the massive beast of code which LibreOffice represents. Add to that the fact that an even smaller number really know anything about the
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 06:42 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote: Question: Which version of LibreOffice are you using? 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2? Many issues/bugs have been fixed in the 3.4.x line that has not yet been fixed in the 3.3.x line. 3.4.x reads MS formats better, is one of the fixes in that line. I kissed MSO completely on Feb. 2010 when I choose Ubuntu as my OS on my new desktop. Then when LibreOffice came out I kissed OpenOffice.org goodbye. I had been using MSO since Office 95 or 97, with the last one Office 2003. As for releasing software with bugs, this is normal, even with MS products. Many bugs are found in real world testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are reported, they are placed on some type of bug needing to be fixed list. Then it is up to the individuals who do the programming/developing [all volunteers] to choose which bug they have the skills to fix. I was a mainframe programmer. I was really good. I am not skilled in the programming needed for developing/fixing code for LibreOffice. We all hope that the next release has the bug fixed that causes problems for some groups of users. Each release does its best to have as many issues fixed as it can with the fixed release schedule. With a fixed release schedule, it give the developers/helpers/bug-fixers a time line to do the work. Some bugs takes a long time to find the code that is the problem. I was once told that the code base for LibreOffice [and OpenOffice.org] is 100's of thousands of lines of code. Some are no longer used, while some are in need of cleaning up. The LibreOffice developers took OpenOffice.org's open source code base and dedicated themselves to cleaning up all the messy and bad coding that was in the OOo code base. They did a lot of that and made improvements and more functions/abilities in their 3.3.0 release and came out with it before Oracle's people came out with OOo's 3.3.0 package. Plus, the tech-media stated that LibreOffice was a better product from the volunteers for The Documents Foundation/ LibreOffice than was put out by the paid employees [and some volunteers] at Oracle. To be honest, I was told that many of the bugs that are annoying LibreOffice users can be traced back to the original messed up core coding and the fixes placed on top of that coding to make it work, instead of fixing that core code that is not working correctly. That is some of the hardest work for our volunteeers, to trace and fix the core coding that should have been fixed long time ago when it was developed during the time Sun Microsystems owned the OpenOffice brand. Our developers are all volunteers and they are doing the best that they can. If Sun, and then Oracle, paid employees working 8 hours a day 5 days a week was working on developing/fixing/improving the OpenOffice.org product and did not do as good of a job putting out the 3.3.0 version of OOo as was put out with the all volunteer package of LibreOffice, we have to give our people a hand for all that they did to make LO better than OOo. Our volunteers are doing the best job as possible for volunteers and their limited amount of time after they come home from their paid jobs. They deserve out thanks for their dedication to making LibreOffice the best they can make it with the limits to their time to do the work. Sorry for the band standing, but our volunteers are doing everything they are able to do to make LibreOffice the best free MSO alternative office package. Well said, the vast majority of people working on any aspect of LO are volunteers doing the best they can with the time available. On 08/26/2011 02:16 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a écrit : Hi Twayne, I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. I fear you might have misunderstood how this project functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when someone decides that their itch to scratch is really starting to annoy them. The developers working as employees of some of the software companies involved in the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt they have their own internal work pressures and priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix and why that particular bug
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
In news:j37dom$l28$1...@dough.gmane.org, Alexander Thurgood alex.thurg...@gmail.com typed: Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a icrit : Hi Twayne, I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. Hi Alex, Thanks for the comeback. Please try to read this with the understanding that every word is meant to be positive and assstive to the LO project. I apprecate your come-back and don't expect a reply but if you wish to, feel free. I'm simply tryng to indicate the other side of the coin and I don't believe I'm alone in this. LO is in danger of going the same route as OOo did. My comments are in no way to denigrate any one in the development area specifically but one of the high hopes I had for LO was a very early-on promise from TDF/the LO grroup that such things wouldn't be tolerated in LO. I was specifically referring to NOT being like OOo was and ignoring early-on bugs. Quite a few OOo bugs still exist in LO's latest version and all in between versions AFAICT. In particular the large-file problems with images tables, properly anchored per LO's instructions, are still present in LO. I like that the envelope issues were sort of taken care of by including templates for the most popular envelope sizes, but it's still several trips around Hogan's Barn if the templates one needs don't exist and if the center/left/right position of text for the addressee doesn't match what the prnter wants, it's still using oddball dimensonal references instead of simply a dimension from the top left side of the envelope. And though I haven't looked on 3.4, having to set BOTH printer AND program paper sizes shouldn't be a requirement, ever. I only know of a few different hi-end processors, but none of them require touchng the printer paper size Settings. But I have learned to work out the how-to for envelopes should I need to, so t's not a huge issue to me personally, more like a big annoyance and time-waster. Others though ... The above and at least 6 more have been in OOo and continued on into LO without beiing fixed. Do you REALLY feel it's unfair to expect those things to have been fixed? Has there ever been a CALL for anyone to the dev masses to dig into these things? LO is an excellent program but it's stuck in the 80-20% rule; and that 20% makes it impossible for me to drop Word for the large files. Not good: I lose not only the ability to do away with Word or WP but I can't make LO a production-use app because of those things. I fear you might have misunderstood how this project functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when someone decides that their itch to scratch is really starting to annoy them. I think I understand how the project functions but of course have no experience in same. The real problem is, LO does not do what it says/implies/menus it can do and still has OOo bugs in it. The developers working as employees of some of the software companies involved in the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt they have their own internal work pressures and priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix and why that particular bug should trump all others, in that case, But again, has a CALL ever gone out for people to work on the old bugs? Like the ones that carried over from OOo? Doesn't anyone realize that the project cannot actually become a leader in the processor industry while it has those and other bugs? You seem to be saying that volunteers will write the original code but then won't stand behind it when parts of it don't function properly or at all. I WANT LO to succeed, but it cannot while such bugs are ignored and figured instead to be good enough for government work. they might as well go and develop something else. Door - ass. Have they been ASKED to work on their bugs? How can they not be expected to keep the code accurate if they simply develop, move on, and no one will fix the bugs? Aren't they ever given a LIST of the most serious bugs and the importance of working on them so LO can do what it says it can do without surprises. The fact of the matter is that there are still too few developers to be able to maintain the massive beast of code which LibreOffice represents. I'm actually only currently interested in Writer here as my use of Calc is standard enough to not run into most other bugs in it (so far, anyway). If the above is a
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
On 08/26/2011 10:14 AM, Twayne wrote: In news:4e577895.1020...@krackedpress.com, ... As for releasing software with bugs, this is normal, even with MS products. But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Many bugs are found in real world testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are reported, they are placed on some type of bug needing to be fixed list. According to Alexander, no, that's not so. Again, see his post to me. Devs only want to write new code, not fix code, apparently not even their own. On the OOo releases list you could nominate a bug as a 'blocker' on the list. LO doesn't have the same (that I'm aware of), but they do have a 'most annoying bug' bug report for releases going forward. As far as I can tell anyone can add to that bug report with their own bug report addition. See: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 [LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs] quote from first comment This is the Meta issue to track most annoying bugs for the release of LibreOffice 3.5.x releases. It helps developers to concentrate on bugs that are important for users. Also it helps users to be aware of potential problems. If anyone wants to raise an Bug for the release, please add the Bug ID as dependent Bug here to the Meta Bug in field Depends on. Additionally please leave a comment here why you think that the bug should be privileged. See also http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria and http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan /quote from first comment So if you've a particular bug that you'd like to see fixed add it there... of course after first reading: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria That does include information on blockers, but I've not found any wiki pages on 'most annoying bug' criteria (yet). So I reckon that until someone defines the MAB criteria, add your MAB to 37361. ... -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
On 08/26/2011 04:25 PM, NoOp wrote: On 08/26/2011 10:14 AM, Twayne wrote: In news:4e577895.1020...@krackedpress.com, ... As for releasing software with bugs, this is normal, even with MS products. But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Many bugs are found in real world testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are reported, they are placed on some type of bug needing to be fixed list. According to Alexander, no, that's not so. Again, see his post to me. Devs only want to write new code, not fix code, apparently not even their own. On the OOo releases list you could nominate a bug as a 'blocker' on the list. LO doesn't have the same (that I'm aware of), but they do have a 'most annoying bug' bug report for releases going forward. As far as I can tell anyone can add to that bug report with their own bug report addition. See: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 [LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs] quote from first comment This is the Meta issue to track most annoying bugs for the release of LibreOffice 3.5.x releases. It helps developers to concentrate on bugs that are important for users. Also it helps users to be aware of potential problems. If anyone wants to raise an Bug for the release, please add the Bug ID as dependent Bug here to the Meta Bug in field Depends on. Additionally please leave a comment here why you think that the bug should be privileged. See also http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria and http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan /quote from first comment So if you've a particular bug that you'd like to see fixed add it there... of course after first reading: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria That does include information on blockers, but I've not found any wiki pages on 'most annoying bug' criteria (yet). So I reckon that until someone defines the MAB criteria, add your MAB to 37361. ... For 3.4: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35673 [LibreOffice 3.4 most annoying bugs] -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Suggestions to PTB
In news:4e558b12.1030...@nouenoff.nl, Cor Nouws oo...@nouenoff.nl typed: Hi Twayne, Twayne wrote (24-08-11 21:44) Can we expect there to be a stop any time soon in development in order to attack and destroy some of the bugs and problems? Along with that, a bug list of what's being fixed, in process and and fixed would go a long, long ways. I always read the change lists, but they don't do a whole lot of good when I'm not familian with that bug, often because the description is different than the accepted bug description. Bugzilla and all other info is public. It is relatively easy to query for bugs, fixed, enhancements etc. A great page, with many queries predefined, is this one: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details Other useful info for your help: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA If you do that yourself, the developers have their hands free to continue fixing bugs, improving build, helping other devs etc. :-) HTH, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org Being Publc has no bearing on this. Digging out the data I mentioned is a huge job and sometimes impossible unless you're involved with the problem itself. For instance, the image problems in a huge file; half the entries/variations of the issue are not there. And many others. Maybe you can sit there for hours making sure something isn't already reported, but I won't do that. The tool just is not userfrendly for the types of information displayed in the manner it needs to be displayed in. I take it your last sentence indicates I should do the fixes myself? No, I can't do that. I doubt I would anyway, considering how hard it is to find all of the complaints at once and get a nice, clean output to work to. But back to my original comment: I think some of the more serious bugs need a concerted effort to be fixed, especially in largish files with over x images on this page, y image on those pages, and so forth. Also, when something is meant to apply to LO, it should NOT have titles, headers about OOo that keeps popping up. Also, when you install a new version, the only place you see the full version is under Help About. All the way thru the install process, it only says 3 or 3.3, not 3.3.4 and so on. It's always been like that AFAIK. Once started, you don't know whether you downloaded the right package or not since it's a 3-digit rev and only one or two digits of the rev are given. I call stuff like that dirty and needing to be swept or the caked mud removed. You're looking at a tree, not the forest. If the forest doesn't have the right trees speces, there may be little to be harvested from it, which is my case. I would simply like to see what's beng worked on clearly listed out, along wth what's not planned, etc., as it is now but with an easier way to bring all related bugs into one list. I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as you're doing now, but not three or four at the same time. All this is part of watching out for the future of LO and being able to say its users are solidly behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have been released until it does work. HTH, Twayne` -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
