Hi Michael, all
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
>
> Ok - so this might be a good argument for keeping
> parallel-installability until later, perhaps for RC1 itself ? I'd really
> prefer to have two releases to test the real release code though :-)
>
This is a Catch 22... If it is installed in para
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 05:12:07PM +, Michael Meeks wrote:
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:OpenID_Auth_Plugin
>
> " Should email verification process still occur?
> * There doesn't appear to be any way around it, as there's no way
> to query an OpenID server for an
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 07:12 -0800, Pedro wrote:
> I know this wasn't addressed to me, but here are my thoughts...
I always like to hear your thoughts :-)
> First of all RCs: RC releases replace the tester's stable release. I know it
> can't be otherwise.
Ok - so this might be a
Hi Pedro,
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 08:48 -0800, Pedro wrote:
> But the main obstacle IMO is the requirement to have to subscribe to yet
> another account. I have suggested elsewhere that OpenID should be adopted as
> the default identification method.
I agree.
> Most people already have an
Hi,
there have been created the libreoffice-3.4.99.3 tag for 3.5.0-beta3 release.
The corresponding official builds will be available within 3 days or so.
See the attached list of changes against 3.5.0-beta2.
See also the schedule at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#3.5_release
an
Kohei Yoshida wrote
>
> Perhaps there is something about bugzilla and its environment that hold
> them back.
>
Bugzilla IS user unfriendly. The LO form is a great improvement over that.
But the main obstacle IMO is the requirement to have to subscribe to yet
another account. I have suggested e
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 16:22 +, Pedro Lino wrote:
> >> To be honest I'm puzzled that a program which reportedly is used by 25
> >> *million* people worldwide has half a dozen people in QA... I guess this
> >> shows a lot about human nature :(
> >
> > Could you clarify on this? I'm not sure how
Hi Kohei
> The truth is that different people have different pet peeve bugs they
> want backported to 3.4.x, and we can't respond to all of them because
> it's extra work. Backporting a change is not free, someone has to
> review the change and make sure that change won't introduce regressions.
>
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 10:51 -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> I'm the one you
> made the change
Correction: I'm the one *that* made the change
I hate typing.
--
Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail addr
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 07:12 -0800, Pedro wrote:
> OTH more releases means more features but also more bugs. And because new
> bugs occur, old bugs are left behind.
> Here is an example of what I'm talking about (and the reason why I insisted
> on giving more weight to 3.4.5 than to 3.5.0...)
> htt
АУКЦИОН В ЭЛЕКТРОННОЙ ФОРМЕ.
Практическое занятие в компьютерном классе по проведению аукциона на
электронной торговой площадке (для участников размещения заказа).
Занятие будет проводиться: 25 января в Москве
Регистрация по телефону: 8 (495) 921-30-17
Обучение поставщиков порядку участия в откр
Hi Kishin
Thank you for using LO and for the compliments.
This is not the User support mailing list. You should submit your
questions/suggestions there
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/mailing_list/MailingListOptions.jtp?forum=1639498
Nevertheless here are some answers
Anupgroup wrote
>
>
Hi Michael
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
>
> So - I'd love to understand this desire for less frequent releases
> better :-) After all, we have tinderboxes churning out at least daily
> releases (in theory), perhaps several a day if we are lucky.
>
> What is the concern about having new RC'
Dear Sirs
Hi.
I recently installed Libreoffice and am quite happy with it.
However, I think there is room for improvement in the following areas
In the spreadsheet program, when data is filtered, I can only filter 1 cell at
a time.
With MS office I am able to "check/tick" multiple boxes
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 16:20 +0100, Nino Novak wrote:
> Just some gut feelings from an occasional tester.
Good to understand these, thanks for sharing :-)
> First, somehow I'd personally like to have a longer period for Release
> related
> QA activities/events, at least a one-week perio
15 matches
Mail list logo
