Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Internal Updater

2014-07-21 Thread khagaroth
I don't find this that useful. Unless the internal updater starts using differential updates (which would be great), I think it's better to just open the download site in a browser. On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I know we've discussed this

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] is fdo#81113 a release blocker for 4.3.0?

2014-07-21 Thread suokunlong
Hi, I do not thinks that one blocks the release of 4.3.0. * Although webquery is an important feature, I think not a lot of people use it in Calc to do daily jobs. If they do, they will not use a fresh libreoffice version to do so, they should choose stable versions. * Also, as I

[Libreoffice-qa] Italy UI: Left side of Options dialog in English

2014-07-21 Thread suokunlong
Hi all, I think this bug needs some special attention: Bug 80326 - [Missing translation]: Options - left side dialogue aren't translated - Italian version. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80326 The strings on left-side of options dialog are in English since 4.3 rc1, and the same

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Internal Updater

2014-07-21 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
Khargaroth you coudl actually do one better. have it when download is clicked have it automatically poll the nearest mirror to you and download the installer from within LO and have it auto run and update ones system. not sure though how much work that would be though. We would eliminate the need

[Libreoffice-qa] What if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?

2014-07-21 Thread Aleksandr P
Hello. Sometimes I meet a situation, when a bug was confirmed for old LibreOffice version but can not be reproduced in new one. In QA/Bugzilla/FAQ (https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/FAQ#How_to_terminate_a_Bug_if_it_can.27t_be_reproduced_any_longer) it is written: “If a bug has been

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] What if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?

2014-07-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi, On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:14:52PM +0400, Aleksandr P wrote: What is current QA-team position? If you know why this bug is fixed (as in a developer said: this commit should fix that or used the bug id in a commit message) its RESOLVED/FIXED. If you cannot reproduce the bug anymore but could

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] What if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?

2014-07-21 Thread Joel Madero
Hi Aleksandr, What Bjoern said but keep in mind sometimes users aren't happy with this. If a user is requesting a backport to a currently supported version, it's up to QA to decide if it's worth the hassle of finding out the commit that fixed it, poking the developer, and then getting them to

[Libreoffice-qa] Bug Squashing Session in 90 Minutes

2014-07-21 Thread Joel Madero
Hi All, QA is doing a bug squashing session (confirming/closing bugs) in 90 minutes. Feel free to jump in if you have a spare 10 minutes. http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa We've seen some great progress this past week or so and we're on the border of being the lowest

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-users] Bug Squashing Session in 90 Minutes

2014-07-21 Thread Tommy
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:20:23 +0200, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: Hey Charles, On 07/21/2014 08:23 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hello Joel, Next time please let us know in advance... It was a very last minute thing, got up this morning and saw a few people in the chat and said

[Libreoffice-qa] Second Opinion Needed

2014-07-21 Thread Joel Madero
I have closed this bug twice as NOTABUG but the user does not agree so requesting second opinion: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81627 Thanks Best, Joel ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address:

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Second Opinion Needed

2014-07-21 Thread Terrence Enger
Sorry to be long-winded. I am too tired to write shorter. On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 21:19 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I have closed this bug twice as NOTABUG but the user does not agree so requesting second opinion: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81627 That report is FILESAVE: