Hi,
Andre Schnabel wrote:
As Christian already said .. we *are* helping, some of us *did* go through the RFE process (I never did, as I've foreseen, what would happen). But sometimes it seems, our help is not wanted.
It is my impression that the RFE process never took off, because it was too late for OOo 2.0. And not much has happened since the initial ideas were floated, because 2.0 is still not out and most work still goes there.
OOo 2.0 had one big step forward in handling planned changes by making most of the work public. The 'Q concept' was published, specs were published and announced - sometimes well before implementation and most feature issues were entered in IZ instead of the Sun-internal bug tracking system. This already would have allowed community participation, but it was not explicitly solicited. It is my impression that this opportunity was not used very much.
But now OOo 2.0 is approaching a close and now is the time to return to the things that were formerly postponed to 'post-2.0' and to consider any new ideas for the 3.0 release cycle. This is what Louis is doing here.
What did you foresee would happen with the RFE process? AFAICT the plan was to implement a better RFE process for the release after 2.0, and this is still possible and you can participate in making that a reality. If you don't participate, you shouldn't complain if it doesn't happen. And if you and others don't participate because you 'foresee' it not becoming a reality, then that may simply be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Of course the very long release cycle we've been having is a large part of the problem and because of it most RFE submitted after the 2.0 planning phase are still waiting in some queue. But that this is a problem is known and there is an ongoing discussion how this problem can be avoided - again for the time *after* 2.0.
Honestly saying, I don't really know, why I care about issues, that could be resolved within minutes ..
How do you know that? If you know, why don't you resolve them yourself? Do you have examples? Do you consider that changing the user interface requires more than changing the code (e.g. specifications, documentation, translation).
There certainly were problems with how some issues were handled. But all participants occasionally make mistakes (e.g. some issues remain unhandled, because they have the wrong owner, component, status or target milestone. If you see some systematic problem, then you should attempt to get the process improved. For RFEs the need to improve the process is known and has just been sleeping.
that I could resolve by myself, if just somebody would give me a hint ..
If you need a hint, then you should ask on the appropriate dev@<project> mailing list. In my experience most requests on these lists get answered quickly - if there is someone who knows the answer. If an issue is assigned to a developer that requests community help (target "OOo Please Help"), then asking in the issue (or directly addressing the issue owner) should also work.
just to see them targeted to OOo later, 2.0.1 or even worse beeing left without any comment.
If an issue is left without comment and target milestone, then it probably has a wrong owner and/or status. If an issue is retargeted, then it has an owner, but that owner can't fix it for the next release for some reason, which should be stated in the issue (if it isn't, ask the owner or project lead).
Ciao, J�rg
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
