https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64930
[email protected] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORME |--- Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from [email protected] --- (In reply to comment #1) > I can confirm the problem on 3.6.6.2 release but it's been fixed in 4.0 > series so marking as WORKSFORME. There is a chance the fix will be > backported to 3.6.7 but without knowing the exact patch that fixed it I > can't request the developer to backport it. I recommend upgrading to 4.0 if > you're comfortable doing so, it uses a whole new profile so it shouldn't > affect your 3.6 profile at all. > > Thanks for the report! Thank you for looking at the problem. I do appreciate it. Please consider an agrument why the bug should be fixed in a 3.6.x release. 1. LO Calc is buggy. I use it frequently, and continually encounter bugs and they don't involve new features. Except for someone using only extremely basic features, I have every reason to think that others have the same experience. I don't know details of the numbering scheme, but the fact that this current bug is number sixty-four thousand nine hundred thirty seems to indicate that there's no shortage of bugs. 2. Maybe it's possible to change the way bugs are addressed and improve the situation. For a product that requires the continual addition of new features, stability can be an issue. Having a "production" release and an "experimental/development" release (or whatever the terminology used by the LO community to refer to the current state: 3.6.x is "production" and 4.0 is "development") is meant to deal with this. But this only works if ALL bugs in 3.6.x are fixed. Otherwise there's no assurance that there is a stable release available or a stable one is ever produced. The only way to have a version with no bugs is to fix all the bugs in a version without adding new features. There also needs to be a way to regression test existing features after changes are made. 3. It is not a solution to advise a user to move to the newer 4.0 to get around a problem. This is just moving to a different set of bugs or different set of manifestations of old bugs. Surely no one suggests that 4.0 has no bugs. Serious users of LO need a stable version. I suggest that, for the typical user, this is a much more important issue than the addition of new features. 4. Isolating a bug to the detailed level that I isolated bug 64930 is time-consuming for the user. The isolated bug should be viewed as a godsend by the LO developers because it provides an avenue to find a mistake that may have other manifestations and far-reaching implications. Clearly there is no effective test suite used by LO developers or such (simple) bugs wouldn't exist in the version of the product recommended for those that need stability. Therefore isolated bugs are very valuable. Please be aware that software mistakes can manifest themselves in more than one way, so testing the problem in a different version of the product doesn't guarantee that the problem was fixed, but only that it doesn't manifest itself in exactly the same way. Until you know exactly what the mistake is, you don't know if anything has been fixed. 5. I'm making the case for fixing this bug in 3.6.x and to fix every problem in 3.6.x (or 3.x) so that there is a stable version for users who can't afford to spend their time on bugs. Please advise how the issues addressed in this reply can get an audience with those that can influence the direction of LO. 6. Consider this assertion. Microsoft's hope is that the LO development is completely undisciplined and never produces a stable version that is worthy of broad user adoption - so they can continue to rake in their billions in annuities for work done a generation ago. Maybe there won't be lots of money made on LO, but what we don't spend on MS Office is the same as making money, tax-free in every principality. Thank you. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
