On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 04:39:10PM -0800, Jonathon Blake wrote: > Chr5istian wrote: > > > It is an easy attitide because you can always blame the others for > > your changes not making it through. > > That is _exactly_ what you are doing here.
Who am I blaming for /my/ changes not to come through? > > saying something like: "Don't even try it, this is a waste of time > > because you won't get it on the site" > > Go read Issuezilla. Start with Issue # 1, until you get to the > 42700 is the most recent one that sent a message. 42732 is the > highest number I see in my inbox. Don't mix up changes of the sourcecode and changes to the website. And where is your point? (There is no issue numbered 1. btw my first issue is #37) > Look at how long it takes for an issue to be filed, till completed. Again: don't mix up changes to the sourcode with changes for the website. If at all, only include patches in your query. > [...] > > Sorry to say that. Things are accepted easily. Everybody agreed with > > the contribution page. You were only missing someone to do the final > > step. > > If Daniel has to wait months for "someone to do the final step" how > long are other people going to wait for that individual to magically > appear and make the change. Don't you read what I write? The problem is that he waits for months instead of keeping nagging about it. > Two years? Three years? Four years? If you sit still and do nothing nothing will happen. This is of course exagerrated! I don't want to say that Daniel "did nothing"! > > If nobody cares about it, then do it yourself (do It yourself means: > > find someone to upload the files). > > That is _no_ way to run a business, much less a volunteer project like OOo. You cannot expect others to do your work. > > This is another issue because of licensing and other issues > > (problems with the contents for some countries, and similar) > > In which country is there a problem with the licence that that > material is under? See the archives. IIRC correctly it even was japan (nor sure). > Or content of that site, for that matter? ? Content of that site? What site, the whole OOo-site? What does this have to do with cliparts? > > inclusion (apart from the concerns of the issues avove). > > (file an issue in the first place and assign it to that person) > > Take a look at the issues Daniel has filed. Point me to the issues Daniel has filed. I cannot find one regarding cliparts. I cannot find /any/ issue reported by him that lies around unanswered/took ages to get handled. And those issues that are open (7) are not an example of things lying around on the OOo-side. issue 15624 is about the application -> irrelevant issue 15625 is one issue that felt asleep (this issue did not involve any request of havins something uploaded or not -> irrelevant) issue 15630 is about the application -> irrelevant issue 24256 is about the applictaion -> irrelevant issue 29892 is about the creation of a new project. In this issue Daniel is the one who doesn't answer for about a month -> irrelevant issue 37511 is about the application -> irrelevant issue 42036 has been filed Feb 4, Louis answered on Feb 18 (remember he was away) None of these issues can be used as an example of "see how bad the process works". While having a look on his resolved/closed issues, I only found positive examples, that show that issueZilla *does* works.. His key was uploaded one day after the issue has been filed. (27985) His request to have a link changed for the user guide has been fixed one day after submission of the issue. (34089) His request for write access to www was handled the same day the issue has been filed (34416) The issue for the files from OOoauthors has been filed on Saturday, on the next Monday the issue was fixed (35658) the only thing that took a little longer was the one to get his name on the credits page. (32765) But since this one involved non-webpage folks it can only be taken partially as a valid issue concerning this discussion. The other issues are about the application and are irrelevant (no patch or similar) > > Again: It is aleays easy to tell "this is broken". But you fail to > > give concrete examples in this case. > > To expect a specific example when the end user has no idea of what is > wrong is inane. Believing that you can fix something without knowing what is broken is insane. And again: The user doesn't need to know /what exactly/ is wrong, but where the problems start! Jean proved that this is possible! Why do you deny that? > One way to fix it, is to run the material through Babelfish, > translating it into French, then run it through Babelfish, translating > it into German, then run it through Babelfish, translating it into > English. Sure. > If the resulting instructions still are clear, they probably are > understandable to people who have zero computer knowledge. If they > are garbled, or mishmashes,. then toss the material away, and start > writing again, from scratch. Just name one single documentation that you can run through babelfish multibple times and that still is understandable. Wake up. > And repeat that process until the instructions can survive that sort > of round robin translation, unscathed. If you think that it is so easy to write a fool-proof guide, then go ahead and write it. Obviously those who wrote the current docu are to dumb to get it right. (No, I was not involved in writing the current docu) ciao Christian -- NP: Corrosion Of Conformity - Shake Like You --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
