Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Streamlining Improving Triage Efforts
Joel Madero schrieb: So I'm trying to streamline Hi, looks plausible. Unfortunately the queries for UNCONFIRMED bugs are not reliable (not because of technical issues, but because info in the reports often is incorrect), so that the priority often is not clear until the work has been done. And often the workflow needs a different proceeding than to follow the priorities, because wrangling with a bug shows relations to other bugs what also still needs clarification, what leads to other bugs Sometimes it costs a week or so until I have checked all possible relations and added all required info. But nevertheless, it might help to avoid long pending regressions if everybody at least tries to do the most important (looking) things first. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] Role of the QA calls
Hi, in discussions I sometimes read statements like „...formal vote next call”. I think here some clarification is required. The QA call has no command of the QA community. The calls and their participants are not a formal entity of TDF. The only legitimation of the results of these calls can be that decisions are wise, well and comprehensible founded, what would be an appropriate base that community might follow. Only a logic decision, promising success and plausible for the other members of the community grant acceptance. The sight of an accidental majority of accidental present laymen is irrelevant. TDF is a meritocratic institution, not a democratic one, and that's the same with the QA community. So, of course, the calls may coordinate the work of the participants as they want. And some of the results are really great, for example the rework and additionally new creation of the QA Wiki and web pages. But if the talk is about things affecting other people's work or even do something what might be called decisions, the results should be presented to the community in clear, brief, transparent way like: „Our conclusion was that we should do abc because of def, we also thought about ghi and jkl, but we dismissed those alternative because of mno and pqr. If we don't hear concerns, xyz will proceed”. So please think about the presentation of the results of the calls. To be honest - my regard concerning the QA calls is not good. All the decisions are reasoned with we agreed. That's not sufficient, the call has to reason why the rest of the community should accept and follow those ideas. Currently for many issues (not only related to QA calls) I only see actionism what often shows a lack of understanding of the complex matters. Because I do not want to compromise someone here in the project I choose an example from somewhere else, advice I got the last weeks often was very similar to this joke: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122133#c3. The working sphere in the LibO project caused considerable discomfort for me, and because I doubt that this incompatibility can be solved, I decided to leave the LibO project. In future I will contribute to Open Source PLC Programming Libraries. Bye Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-marketing] Re: New QA Site - Press Release?
Petr Mladek schrieb: Please, do not move too much content there unless it will be easy to update it. Hi, yes, such technical details should remain in the Wiki were they can be adapted easily to latest results. The Silverstripe version should have focus on nice viewing and inviting, clear description of QA activity. Of course several details can be listed, also Parallel Installation (in some kind of presenting our tools or whatever), but the Silverstripe version should only present the possibility of having several LibO Versions on the Computer for testing and comparison (what also might be interesting for deciders), technical details should remain in the Wiki. Anyway, I appreciate the activities to create good and well structured documentation. +1 CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] fdo#63680 - Windows builds of Master - Writer crashing
V Stuart Foote schrieb: I asked a very specific question that is appropriately addressed to any active QA participant--is there anyone that is building master on Windows and not having the problem of fdo#63680? Hi, of course that is an appropriate and useful question. That is one of the intentions of this list, to attract attention and ask for help concerning a tricky bug. And also discussion whether an additional tinderbox can be crated and other organizational questions can and should be discussed here. And most of it not in the bug, but a Link (in the Bug) to the thread in the archive might be useful). But all bug related results (I still see that with ... and so on) should be added as a comment to the Bug, so that all relevant info is available there. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] FAQ for qa.libreoffice.org
Bjoern Michaelsen schrieb: Hmmm, I kinda feel its not good to put that on a website with restricted access Hi, +1 I think we should distinguish 2 different (but overlapping, of course) areas. a) What we here are talking about every day! What bugs are blockers, how to use Qa-Contact-field, ... and thousand other details. This clearly is something for the Wiki, that will be under construction forever. And IMHO that does not interest a newbie and might discourage. b) What makes this LibO product with User-QA different to MS Office? Are really developers interested what users find out? How does a report lead to a fix? And And And ... . Such questions and answers concerning the culture of our QA and convincing that _really_ every normal user with some LibO-experience and a little accurateness can do valuable contribution (what will lead to a better product for him) have their place on qa.libreoffice.org. And for that I recommend intensive collaboration with Marketing. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] Writer Printing Bugs with LibO 4
Hi all, I think currently it is rather useless to submit additional bugs concerning WriterPrinting OLE problems. We already have lots of bugs similar to Bug 60280 - PRINTING of TABLE borders, borders around paragraphs and footer, some graphic elements suppressed by OLE objects in document, and as long as no dev has started bugfixing things will become only more unclear. And it's really not easy to decide what one might be a DUP of what one. But it might be good to have enough sample documents to test a fix or fixes under all thinkable conditions. We can rededicate Bug 63842 - OLE object and line get misplaced as a sample document collection, where documents can be attached without big thinking about what of the lots of aspects we already have seen that document might be? That would save time now, and when we have fixes and see some more clear what problems are remaining we can do lots of tests with those documents, if the problem has disappeared they simply can be obsoleted one by one with a short comment. So we can collect some more test documents without swelling the zoo of related bugs. Florian, what do you think? CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] After EOL has been reached...
Robinson Tryon schrieb: Rainer, how does this plan sound to you? Hi Robinson, not good! We will not create complicated wrong rules for things what are easy to understand. And whether a Version still is useful for indicating where in the history a (newly reported) bug appeared has nothing to do with the date of the last build. So already the subject of this thread is misleading for this issue. LibO-Bugzilla admins will switch old Versions to inactive when they see that no more (or very few) bugs appear newly in BZ with that version. That's the only indicator that counts, that already is in progress, no reason for concerns. It seems that 3.4 will reach a status what sill allow to switch inactive the non-release versions (see statistics for last half year [1]) soon. I would appreciate a stop of this rather useless discussion. Rainer [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=componenty_axis_field=versionz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficelongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=allwordskeywords=bug_id=bug_id_type=anyexactemailtype1=substringemail1=emailtype2=substringemail2=emailtype3=substringemail3=chfield=[Bug+creation]chfieldvalue=chfieldfrom=-180dchfieldto=Nowj_top=ANDf1=versiono1=regexpv1=^3.4f2=versiono2=notsubstringv2=releasef3=noopo3=noopv3=format=tableaction=wrap ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Writer Printing Bugs with LibO 4
Florian Reisinger schrieb: I totally agree and closed my bug(s) created today... Hi, I would simply call the bug Test Document for Bug xxx and leave it open related to Bug 60280. And if someone on German mailing list, ASK-LibO or wherever thinks he has an interesting related sample document he also can attach it there. Such a bug with sample documents will not be closed before all samples have been used for testing related fixes. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
License Statement
As requested in Bug 56185 - Bug Wrangler statistics script does not work with new Bugzilla 4.2. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56185: All of my past future code contributions to LibreOffice / TDF may be licensed under the MPL/LGPLv3+ dual license. All other contributions may be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) This holds for future contributions until I explicitly revoke this statement here in this list. -- Rainer Bielefeld ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New text for NEEDINFO Changes
Joel Madero schrieb: This bug has been in NEEDINFO state for more than 180 days Hi, this text IMHO is much too elaborated and prim, please do not use it. If you plan such actions please leave a related description in the Wiki, most here do not have the time to find all scattered info in various threads. Currently I haven't a clue how the text will be used. As personal Mail? As comment in The bug? For comments in the Bug please consider that queries have an important role for bug wrangling, and the text uses several possible key words like regular, information, time, ... Please limit the comment to 1 line + a link to text in the Wiki concerning more info! And BTW, still nobody was able to contribute a plausible explication concerning the benefit of these auto-closes (except hope that some users will contribute more useful info, but my experience is that most of them only write still in version ...) - or did I miss something? CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-commits] dev-tools.git: scripts/qawrangler-stats.py
scripts/qawrangler-stats.py |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
New commits:
commit 1bf495fea2c8d5592e2ebdce15e262ad42789049
Author: Rainer Bielefeld libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de
Date: Sun Apr 21 01:58:02 2013 +0200
fdo#56185: fixup for Bugzilla 4
diff --git a/scripts/qawrangler-stats.py b/scripts/qawrangler-stats.py
old mode 100755
new mode 100644
index 35a1354..f73c38e
--- a/scripts/qawrangler-stats.py
+++ b/scripts/qawrangler-stats.py
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ try:
txt = gz.read().decode('us-ascii')
gz.close()
-reportedby = re.compile(r'^.*ReportedBy:.(.*)$', re.MULTILINE)
+reportedby = re.compile(r'^.*Reporter:.(.*)$', re.MULTILINE)
reporters = re.findall(reportedby, txt)
wrangledby = re.compile(r'^.*(.*) changed:$', re.MULTILINE)
___
Libreoffice-commits mailing list
libreoffice-comm...@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-commits
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [LibreOffice-QA] Conference Call 2013-04-19 - Agenda Minutes
Sophie Gautier schrieb: please consider that we (FR group) are acting as a community and not as individuals, Concerning this process https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BSA/Localization it seems a bit bureaucratic to me. Hi Sophie, I agree. Currently I see a tendency that the QA calls generate decisions and want to change proceedings without knowing enough concerning existing proceedings. The advisable way would be to ask the French QA team via mailing list to leave some notes in the Wiki how they proceed (or how they plan to proceed). If then someone has ideas for improvements he can start a discussion with the team within the team (as a newbee there). And only with very good urgent reasons (coordinations needs between such sub-communities or whatever) a discussion may be started on international level. What's more or less the same what Sophie said more friendly. BTW, @Sophie: Is the BSA-Fr already working or at least is there some concrete goal when it should work [2]? If the problems still will need some time for a solution, and also may be for bug reports in French language what will find their way into Bugzilla also in future, I can offer a Bugzilla solution. The qa@fr mailing list will get exactly 1 mail if the list will be added as QA-contact or similar. If the 10 key bug wranglers [1] know how to proceed that should work nearby 100% perfect. Precondition is that the list has a Bugzilla account, the rest are some smart e-mail settings for the account. I prefer such a solution to the current proceeding to add French language users to CC. If you are interested please simply discuss on the fr-qa list and send a ping to me if I can help. Best regards Rainer Addendum: [1] --- Top 10 wranglers March 2013 --- LibreOffice at bielefeldundbuss.de306 joren.libreoffice at telenet.be 271 jmadero.dev at gmail.com 197 bfo.bugmail at spamgourmet.com180 stgohi-lobugs at yahoo.de 152 serval2412 at yahoo.fr 99 cno at nouenoff.nl 81 vstuart.foote at utsa.edu 59 michael.meeks at novell.com58 lionel at mamane.lu57 Hyperlinks [2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BSA/Localization#Who_is_in_charge_of_a_localized_BSA.3F ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] After EOL has been reached...
Robinson Tryon schrieb: Per discussion at the meeting today, we generally agreed to the following: Hi, I left some hints and thoughts on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Talk:QA/Meetings/2013/April_19. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] mailing list administration - SPAM Sender Filters
Hi all, today I replaced lots of single E-Mail addresses in the sender blacklist by smart ReExp filters, what should find also similar addresses. I hope that will reduce amount of SPAM here, I will continue that rework soon. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Question : FILEOPEN bug vs 'filters and storage' bug
Adam Fyne schrieb: What is the difference between bugs posted under 'Writer' section with the keyword 'FILEOPEN', Hi Adam, although the answer might not be really satisfying: Components starting with a lowercase [1] are for developers wrangling deep in the guts of LibO, we normal users normally don't have the skills to follow discussion there. But they are not unused [2]. Sometimes developers submit such bugs to track the activities in a particular code area, sometimes a normal FILESAVE Bug mutates because developers see some deeper relations they want to proceed. Resume (very similar to Michael's): That's for the core developers, don't care about these Components, there are good reasons why they do not appear in the Bug Submission Assistant. But I see a problem, [2] shows a lot of bugs where the filters and storage Component only is worrying, I believe any UNCONFIRMED Bug there [3] is suspicious. If users select one of these Components they only prevent other users from checking and confirming. I will take that on my review-todo list. Best regards Rainer Hyperlinks [1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#filters_and_storage [2] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advancedcomponent=filters%20and%20storageproduct=LibreOfficelist_id=287789 [3] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?list_id=287812o1=regexpquery_format=advancedbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEEDINFOcomponent=contribcomponent=filters%20and%20storagecomponent=frameworkcomponent=sdkproduct=LibreOffice ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] mailing list administration - SPAM Filters
Hi all, today I repaired a broken sender filter (what might have caused some additional SPAM on this list) and added some additional SPAM filter rules. Most of them will simply discard the messages, some of them hold the mails for moderation. @Florian: Please tell me if no. of moderation mails will become unreasonable Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] BSA and Component WWW-Sub-component
Marc Paré schrieb: [...] LibreOfficeBox is not in the list. Should it not be included? Hi Marc, I don't think so, for 1 Bug all 3-4 years sub component all other problems should be sufficient ;-) So it looks: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63648 Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] How to exclude Bugzilla Sub Components from BSA
Hi, some of our Sub Components have been created to grant easy and effective queries, but it is rather improbable that someone using the BSA will need these Sub Component for a bug report. Such Sub components can be defined on the help pages for the components as I demonstrated for Tinderbox on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugzAssHlp_WWW_long Adventages and possible disadvantages see on Talk page there. Please feel free to add more thoughts. How that can work for a Component without separate help template I demonstarte here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BSA/BugReport_Details#Presentation @Joel: I hope that will not break BSA update functions, but I am optimistic. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Version in fdo version picker for SI-GUI
Florian Reisinger schrieb: As this (SI-GUI) is now an official LibreOffice project I lost the tracker at github Hi Florian, thank you for the great tool. I will take your request to the wishlist. Joel and I stumbled upon several inconsistencies and some incompleteness in the Bugzilla Components system, and I promised to create a draft of a ToDo for further discussion in the Wiki End of April. Currently I think that SI-GUI will not produce many Bug reports, so that an own component might be a little excessive. A quick solution I will promise here in few minutes. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Version in fdo version picker for SI-GUI
Florian Reisinger schrieb: Hi Florian, how will distribution be in future? A solution with Extensions website (what will need the latest build there) or will you remove SI-GUI from there and only contribute links on the QA Wiki pages and similar? Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Version in fdo version picker for SI-GUI
Hi Florian Here a quick solution keeping the current Extensions Component with correct Bugzilla Syntax you see on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Extensions until we have a final decision. Unfortunately (of course) the SI-GUI name will break consistence with older reports (Server Installation GUI), but that should not be a big problem. The Sub Component will not appear in BSA Picker If you do not want to keep Extensions Website up to date with latest builds you should leave a link to the now download location in the Version description or elsewhere. And yes, I am happy that we are getting some progress in QA Wiki what was very outdated and with unclear structure. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - 3.3 non releases removed from Version Selector
As announced here http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/2013-April/004128.html today I unchecked Bugzilla flag Enabled For Bugs for following versions. So following versions will be removed from the LibO Versions dropdown for bug reports and for editing existing bugs. The versions will stay available for Queries. Version... Active Bugs Action --- 3.3.0 Beta3No98 Delete: disabled months ago 3.3.0 RC1 No 127 Delete 3.3.0 RC2 No 146 Delete 3.3.0 RC3 No69 Delete 3.3.0 RC4 No70 Delete 3.3.1 RC1 No49 Delete 3.3.2 RC1 No18 Delete 3.3.2 RC2 No24 Delete This measure is to keep size of the dropdown acceptable, I am planning the same for 3.4 when I see that we have more or less no more reports for 3.4-non-release Versions. 3.3.0 Beta2 for inherited bugs and the 3.3 releases will stay active for reports of bugs what appeared with 3.3.x. Exact Version info should be contributed in the bug report. After a fix for Bug 55460 - BUGZILLAASSISTANT: Exclude inactive versions from version selector https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55460 also BSA version picker will become a little shorter. CU Rainer P.S.: In this thread I want to keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Removing LibO 3.3 from Versions dropdown in Bugzilla
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: I am thinking about a Version picker cleanup by removing most 3.3. Versions. Hi, unfortunately that only will bring progress for the Bugzilla Version Dropdowns, but not for the BSA Vrsion selectors before a fix for Bug 55460 - BUGZILLAASSISTANT: Exclude inactive versions from version selector https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55460 But inactive Versions do not cause Problems for BSA bug submissions for those versions, so that BSA problem does not hinder. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Lifecycle of builds?
Pedro wrote: Does this also mean that 3.4 versions can already be removed from the bugzilla Version picker? And 3.5 versions after the 18th of this month? Hi Pedro, no, we can't. Version info in BZ should show where the bug appeared (or at least has been observed the first time), also see https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Version. That has nothing to do with our maintenance for a Version branch. Please also see [Libreoffice-qa] Removing LibO 3.3 from Versions dropdown in Bugzilla, where I demonstrated some criteria for versions removal. I think End of 2013 we can think about something similar for 3.4. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Lifecycle of builds?
Pedro schrieb: The point here is that if a version is past the EOL and nobody will fix bugs in that branch, there is no point in reporting bugs first observed in 3.4 or 3.5 (otherwise you should NOT remove 3.3 from the list either) Hi Pedro, you are completely wrong, I doubt that you read the linked texts. Isn't that up to the BOD to decide? If the EOL was after 6 months why End of 2013? I do not see to what you refer, my comment was concerning removal of 3.4 versions from BZ Version picker (the same way I will do for 3.3 this week), what is completely out of BODs interest. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] Removing LibO 3.3 from Versions dropdown in Bugzilla
Hi, I am thinking about a Version picker cleanup by removing most 3.3. Versions. Currently we have 14 different Versions in the picker. We obviously still need 3.3.0 Beta 2, what is our Version for inherited Bugs. Within the last 180 days we had 50 bug reports for the other 3.3. Versions [1], all of them for releases. For Comparison: first 6 Months 1220: 67 reports, 3 ones for releases [2], last 6 Months of 2012 55 ones, 3 ones for RC [3]. For 3.3 we have no bibisecting, so that it is impossible for QA to narrow down appearance of bug precisely, and I doubt that for developers it sould make a big difference whether the report is for 3.3.0 RC3 of 3.3.0 RC4. So I believe we should mark the not-release-3.3 as inactive, what means they will stay for the bugs where they are used, but can not be used for new bug reports (except by the LibO Bugzilla Administrators) because they will no longer be shown in the Versions selector. If I do not see concerns here I will do the remove End of the week. CU Rainer P.S.: We need a fix for [Bug 58973] Broken Query result to avoid such monster Query links Hyperlinks: [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=componenty_axis_field=versionz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficecomponent=Android+Impress+Remotecomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters+and+storagecomponent=Formula+Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics+stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing+and+PDF+exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWresolution=---resolution=FIXEDresolution=WONTFIXresolution=DUPLICATEresolution=WORKSFORMEresolution=MOVEDresolution=NOTABUGresolution=NOTOURBUGlongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=all wordsk eywords=bug_id=bug_id_type=anyexactversion=3.3.0+Beta3version=3.3.0+RC1version=3.3.0+RC2version=3.3.0+RC3version=3.3.0+RC4version=3.3.0+releaseversion=3.3.1+RC1version=3.3.1+releaseversion=3.3.2+RC1version=3.3.2+RC2version=3.3.2+releaseversion=3.3.3+releaseemailtype1=substringemail1=emailtype2=substringemail2=emailtype3=substringemail3=chfield=[Bug+creation]chfieldvalue=chfieldfrom=-180dchfieldto=Nowj_top=ANDf1=noopo1=noopv1=format=tableaction=wrap [2] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=componenty_axis_field=versionz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficecomponent=Android+Impress+Remotecomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters+and+storagecomponent=Formula+Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics+stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing+and+PDF+exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWresolution=---resolution=FIXEDresolution=WONTFIXresolution=DUPLICATEresolution=WORKSFORMEresolution=MOVEDresolution=NOTABUGresolution=NOTOURBUGlongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=all wordsk eywords=bug_id=bug_id_type=anyexactversion=3.3.0+Beta3version=3.3.0+RC1version=3.3.0+RC2version=3.3.0+RC3version=3.3.0+RC4version=3.3.0+releaseversion=3.3.1+RC1version=3.3.1+releaseversion=3.3.2+RC1version=3.3.2+RC2version=3.3.2+releaseversion=3.3.3+releaseemailtype1=substringemail1=emailtype2=substringemail2=emailtype3=substringemail3=chfield=[Bug+creation]chfieldvalue=chfieldfrom=2012-01-01chfieldto=2012-06-26j_top=ANDf1=noopo1=noopv1=format=tableaction=wrap [3] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=componenty_axis_field=versionz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficecomponent=Android+Impress+Remotecomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters+and+storagecomponent=Formula+Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics+stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing+and+PDF+exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWresolution=---resolution=FIXEDresolution=WONTFIXresolution=DUPLICATEresolution=WORKSFORMEresolution=MOVEDresolution=NOTABUGresolution=NOTOURBUGlongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=all wordsk
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] How to change QA processes: was: What should we do with bugs filed against Extensions/Templates?
Petr Mladek schrieb: Ah, this sounds pretty bossy. Hi, yes, may be. My tone reflects my exception. I see too much unqualified discussion. Before thinking about changes everybody should have have understood the current system, why it is how it is? With such a base improvement seems more promising I know, that sounds rather obdurate, as I would want to defend my creation against any change. That's wrong. But I am such kind of Swiss wrist watch maker. 50 years ago that was an admired art, today it's considered spinning mills. Quality Assurance has to do something with quality, and we have to observe and grant the quality of your own work. And here I have serious concerns. Let's take Bug 63210 - EDITING: Superscript Defaults incorrect. Joel, please excuse me for taking that example, it was the first but I saw this morning in my New bug reports folder, and it's a typical one for observations I see with rising number in the last months. The goal seems to be to get the reports out of the QA process as quick as possible (because we have so many untouched reports), but I do not like that way, that only increases the amount of unfixed confirmed bugs. If we cans save 5 developer minutes at each bugs with careful research, that's a potential of 55 hours for the 679 bugs what changed to NEW in March 2013. That's 1 work of week for a busy developer! It has status NEW, what means ready for bugfixing, https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugTriage#Step_5._Set_Status item 1, but I believe it's not: a) We have a report without info concerning Version and OS, and a confirmation for 1 Linux distribution. So current knowledge (for the moment) seems to indicate a LINUX problem? Should the report leave QA process (NEW) without having this corrected or at least mentioned? Well, I confirm that for WIN, and so finally the found OS selection is correct, but without reasoning that's simply wrong. Reporter should be asked for related info. b) In between we have 3.6.6.2, what might be the next release. Shouldn't be checked whether the problem has been solved in between? c) This problem is text language related (of course), in German text language this auto correct does not exist. That might lead to the roots of the problem, I would have liked to find out where that problem started. d) It should be stated that the problem is limited to Enter after the date, works fine if you simply type a space or even after Shift+Enter or Control+Enter. e) Not only Writer is affected, same in Calc with Control+Enter and Draw (and so probably Impress), might also appear in Base. f) The summary line still has that meaningless incorrect. After QA it should be AUTOCORRECT: Superscript of English ordinal number suffixes continued behind 'Enter' directly after suffix. Or similar! Queries for DUPs really are painful if you have lots of bugs only distinguishable by the words improperly and incorrect in Summary. g) Back to versions: This worked fine in 3.3.3, so it seems interesting to know where this problem appeared? And it's a regression. h) The example in the report seems a little misleading to me because of the parenthesis around the date. The screenshot shows what reporter typed, but I would have mentioned what I typed exactly (well, this is splitting hairs) i) May be I even would have tested whether the bug persists with new User Profile? But I doubt that it's related and so I think I would have written I doubt that it's profile related k) And after having added all this information I would think about adding András to CC. I agree with minor rating and we should not bother developers with too many odds and ends, but on the other hand a known bug can be integrated into the work flow for a fix some later. l) And I would have thought about an enhancement request for localized list numbering with correct localized ordinary numbers, but that already is quite a different thing. And so back to the beginning. I like to co work with Swiss wrist watch makers, these guys who know for every of their actions at work why they do it exactly how they do it, and who always check whether there is a possibility how they could do better. The question is whether there is a place for these people in the LibO community. From my point of view, at some places I see too much actionism instead of careful work and enhancement (beneath a lot of good work, of course), and that's a pain for me. We Swiss wristwatch makers need a wristwatch maker workshop with wristwatch makers tools, and I doubt that this workplace will be kept in the LibO project. I will not change the principles of my way of working, when my workplace will have vanished I will not whine, but simply move to a new place where I can work with congenial colleagues. Of course I should have mentioned that I like the efforts to interest more people for bug wrangling, the cleanup in the QA wiki, the thoughts ofa more
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Header of the Print Dialog: Localisation?
Hi Andreas, disc...@de.libreoffice.org is already working on the problem Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - Help for
Jochen schrieb: I added links to bugzilla from the German QA-Wiki (see [1]). Is it okay? Hi Jochen, I also am not satisfied with the current search by click on the Sub Component names. But I had no good ideas and to much other todos. So your query links might be a great service, but definitively they blow up the page size. My first thoughts: a) Currently that page already has much to much contents and is very unclear, so I am not happy to see 100 additional lines there. Additionally these links might appear in the BSA Help, where they also need more place. So I suggest to move that info to the Read more area. b) The current design is a little too dominant. I would prefer some info bar what can be added to any Read more section, quick draft: Status related Statistics UNCONFIRMED | NEEDINFO | REOPENED || CLOSED | REJECTED || Statistics CLOSED includes Resolved and Verified for FIXED, WFM, REJECTED for all INVALID, NOTOURBUG, ... Statistics [1] c) after some experiments Templates should be created for the links, what will ease maintenance d) Pleasetest can be removed, we do not use that. e) I recommend experiments and tests with a component what does not appear in BSA, like graphics stack or so. So my conclusion: no objections againsst such query links in a little more space saving, less dominang design in the Read more areas. Recommend to use Templates directly when you start, because maintenance of the original very long links in lots of Help templates would be very challenging. It seems Qubit (bishop.robin...@gmail.com) is very active in that area with a cleanup, I think you should coordinate your ideas with him. Best regards Rainer Hyperlinks: [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=resolutiony_axis_field=bug_statusz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficecomponent=Databaselongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=allwordskeywords=bug_id=bug_id_type=anyexactemailtype1=substringemail1=emailtype2=substringemail2=emailtype3=substringemail3=chfieldvalue=chfieldfrom=chfieldto=Nowj_top=ANDf1=noopo1=noopv1=format=tableaction=wrap ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Bugzilla Version warning
Tollef Fog Heen schrieb: Seems to be asciibetical, and 4 sorts before M. Hi Tollef, yes, that matches with my results. Some inconsistencies with Versions starting with a non-numeric character we will discuss internally, may be we rename or live with it or ask you for a trick (no message for from or to Version starting with non-numeric). We will ask you for help if result of discussion is that we can't find a solution with our on-bord resources. Thank you and best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] How to report Enhancement Requests for FDO infrastructure (Bugzilla)
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: If I do not read concerns Hi, no concerns, so done https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugzAssHlp_WWW_long CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] New Bugzilla Version warning
Hi, I see that the Change to later Version Warning Enhancement is under construction - great! I am planning to remove the Impress remote Versions from Bugzilla within next hours. I discussed that with Joel and consensus is that a) currently we do not need that, it's enough to handle that like Extensions with Version (See in Summary) b) We need a concept how to handle such new tools in Bugzilla, if I find the time I will start a todo (in the Wiki) together with Joel, soon. What means for the new Enhancement: no need to think about these Remote Version items. May I suggest to keep the Warning test some shorter? Like Sure? Appropriate version is the one where the problem has been observed first. Guidelines link behind Appropriate Version Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - Impress Remote Versions
Today I removed the Impress Remote Versions from Bugzilla. Proceeding until a final Solution for bug handling with LibO related tools: Like with Enhancements https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Version_Picker:_Particular_Versions CU Rainer P.S.: In this thread I want to keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - Impress Remote Versions
Michael Meeks schrieb: Thanks for the link - make sense to me, though I was confused by the comment until I read the page. Hi, if someone has an idea for a more intuitive wording instead of (See in Summary) please let me know here in the list, tat can be modified without causing additional mail traffic. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - Help for
Today I added full syntax BSA Help to the Wiki on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Android_Impress_Remote. Works fine from there (for example: selects correct Component Version in picker), should also work from BSA after an update there and fix the not working Read more ... problem. CU Rainer P.S.: In this thread I want to keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Bugzilla Version warning
Tollef Fog Heen schrieb: It's actually there. Now it even just displays when the list index increases (that is, we assume the versions are sorted with the lowest on top). This seems to be true atm, at least. Hi Tollef, thank you for feedback. Unfortunately it seems some more sophisticated. Very most changes are indicated correctly, but for example take https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63123, what is for 4.0.1.2. Change to Master Old 3.6 (before 4.0.1.2), message will pop up. I also saw that problem at less showy changes, but currently I can't remember where. I will do some tests tomorrow. Can you tell me the relation Index - order in Query Versions picker? So I can try to find a pattern. Thank you and best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Bugzilla Version warning
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: but currently I can't remember where. I will do some tests tomorrow. Hm, Browser cache or whatever else? Currently I indeed only see that Master old 3.6 special case where we get a wrong alarm. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Wiki pages cruft cleanup
Nino Novak schrieb: Am 02.04.2013 11:45, schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen: I cleaned up: Hi, yes, that really looks more pleasing than the boring default Wiki TOC page header, and it is much more clear, well arranged. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] How to report Enhancement Requests for FDO infrastructure (Bugzilla)
Hi Joel, my experience is that FDO sitewranglers most times simply ignore Enhancement Requests concerning FDO infrastructure (Bugzilla) if there is no obvious support by ESC or other TDF well known official members. So I created my recommendation on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA-FAQ#How_to_report_Enhancement_Requests_for_FDO_infrastructure. Most requests like Bug 59869 - Please consider enabling Whining in Bugzilla https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59869 are well founded, no long discussion will be required, but 1/2 minute during the ESC call for a any concerns? - no! might be well invested. If I do not read concerns I will add a note to the LibO/Bugzilla Component Help for BSA. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] French bug in Bugzilla
Sophie Gautier schrieb: Just send the bug id to the qa@fr list any time you find one and we will deal with it. Hi, but that's only possible for subscribers? Jean Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org told on this list that he is willing to translate reports in French language, from time to time I ask him for help. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] What should we do with bugs filed against Extensions/Templates?
Robinson Tryon schrieb: Bugzilla is for bugs that we're willing to address/fix as a project, Hi Robinson, I am (more or less) the the creator of the LibO Bugzilla bug tracking system, so I think I have some overview what should be done and what should not be done. I'll leave some notes there, and make a note about that page section in the agenda for our next meeting. What do you think about moving that proposal to the 'Talk' page for BugTriage? No! Consider that text as the current regulations for the proceeding, if you or anybody else has well founded suggestions he can simply add amendments or corrections with some explications on the talk page. Please excuse me for my direct statement: we do not need a theoretical consideration here, the experienced key players know how to handle that. Butneverthless I agree with some of your and especially Cor's arguments, it is important to state that it's a LibO / TDF service to contribute a platform to make public the Extensions, but the Extensions are out of our responsibility, and users install them on their own risk and have no claims against LibO concerning correct function of the extensions, maintenance and so on. Especially unexperienced end users might draw wrong conclusions if they find a bug report concerning an extension among all the other LibO related bug reports. I will add an additional hint in the Bugzilla and BSA Help for that Component so that everybody can see that the handling of Extension bugs might differ from the handling of bug report related to LibO core components. If somebody thinks we need some more explication / clarification on the Extensions Website, he should simply submit a bug report. Experts will find that, discuss if necessary and contribute a fix. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - Component 'Extensions'
Today I added myself as Default QA contact to ensure that Authors of the Extensions will be informed about the bug. Currently the author is invisible for most users on Extensions Website. I will check existing Bugs and contact authors where necessary. I will try to find a solution with Andreas Mandke. CU Rainer P.S.: In this thread I want to keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Priorizing Chart
Joel Madero schrieb: I added the source document to the wiki: Hi Joel, the .jpg in the wiki is portrait, your document.draw landscape. I would prefer portrait, because that would match better with the normal use of those flowcharts. Is an alternative top-down-workflow portrait version available? With all I do I would prefer small evolution steps to the known public version. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Explanations on the NL BSA purpose
Hi Sophie, with the fix for Bug 60958 BUGZILLAASSISTANT: Greeting text should tell that goal is to make bug reproducible https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60958 the greeting text now tells the requirements for a good report some more clearly. I recommend to adapt the French greeting in a similar way. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] mailing list administration - SPAM Filters
Hi all, today I corrected a SPAM filter rule with consequence Hold for moderation; it also caught some Mails what should have been sent to the mailing list. I hope that now will work correctly. @Florian: Please ping me if you find false alerts (I will also check from time to time). Best regards Rainer P.S.: This thread should keep you up to date, comments (except from co-administrators) or discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] mailing list administration
Florian Reisinger schrieb: Indeed The message headers matched a filter rule from floeff (and you)... Hi Florian, it's important that I can see those mails and check what filter rules have been matched; only so I can improve the filters. Please ping me if your find something unexpected in the moderation line without touching the mails. Thanks and best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: Fwd: Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français!
Hi Rob, I saw, that I got e-mails concerning my BSA-FR test bug submissions with CC for French QA list (Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français!). Is that for test affairs or the plan for the general proceeding in future? It's a French-QA-List decision, but I would not be happy with such additional mails. I use feeds with well considered queries what tell me that a bug what might meet with my skills and/or interests has been submitted. I think that that is more efficient. My main concern: I urgently recommend to avoid any appearance that we would encourage users to submit Bugs in French (or whatever else in future) language. My experience is that briefness and clarity of a Bug are important conditions for a quick bug fix. If a developer has to work through a very long Bug with lots of comments and may be non-English discussions in it he will be deterred. I consider any French BSA UI without a hint that English is preferred Language as a bug. I know, it's something completely new, but may be a better solution might be a checkbox: a) if reporter checks I report in my mother tongue and need translation help b) BSA b1) creates a bug with only 1 text line: A bugreport by mail has been sent to q...@fr.libreoffice.org, list members will provide detailed information soon (and attach attachment) b2) sends all info reporter contributed by mail to q...@fr.libreoffice.org (as already is done in the mails Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français! I got during my tests) only a suggestion for an enhancement, and of course also with some disadvantages, several QA members (like me) understand enough French to understand a report in English language CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: Fwd: Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français!
Rob Snelders schrieb: The French BSA is nearing completion. Hi Rob, Great! I received CC copies of the mails BSA-FR sends to q...@fr.libreoffice.org. Is there any possibility that BSA checks the ID of the new bug and adds it including Summary line Mail subject? Means instadead if Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français! Should be Nouveau dans le BSA français: [Bug 53084] BUGZILLAASSISTANT: focus on page bottom instead on Bugzilla link after Bug Submission If we have many BSA-FR reports that would ease to keep overview. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: Fwd: Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français!
Rob Snelders schrieb: Hi Rob, great step, thank you very much Wrong link [2]? I only find https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage_InProgress/fr Is that already working? I tried to submit some Bugs with French BSA UI * Missing Icon for Android Impress remote * Login not remembered for next bug * Missing hint concerning mandatory English Language for the bug report * Read More link in Writer Help leads to English extended help (but that's a really very small problem) I got message Le rapport de bug a été soumis avec succès. Pour toute question veuillez répondre au mail reçu, but the Bugzilla Bug Link is imssing, and it seems there are no new bug reports? Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: Fwd: Bug sur Nouveau dans le BSA français!
Rob Snelders schrieb: Can this be added later? Maybe create a bug-report for it for now. Hi Rob, yes, or course. I only wanted to mention that so that you have it on the list, but there is no need to do everything with the first step Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] BUGZILLAASSISTANT broken due to nbsp in Component names
I don't understand what is changed. Why do we want to go from spaces in a wiki to nbsp Hi Rob, the intended main change I did was that I corrected wrong space encoding % to %20 https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=BugReport_Detailsdiff=64916oldid=64836 With that wrong encoding the query in the general link in the Help leads to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advancedcomponent=Android%25Impress%25Remoteproduct=LibreOfficeshort_desc=generalshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrlist_id=255870, what of course will not find any hits. Additionally I removee the Sub Component general, what does not make any sense together with all other, what also is somehow general. And after that I added a new mistake with the nbsp; due to obsolete private notes (without thinking about them), some (long) time ago that was necessary with oder Wikimedia for getting some templates working. I corrected my notes and corrected Wiki:BugReport_Details back to normal paces in the Component name. So this problem should no longer exist? any module-name change breaks the BSA Of course changes in Bugzilla and Wiki have to be done synchronously and afterwards BSA has to be updated, and that's similar to Version changes from rc to release. That's known and accepted. But that should not cause an enduring break? Of course syntax rules have to be respected. I will add some syntax hint for the wiki https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Bug_Submission_Assistant#Data_sources matching with the current needs. What Else? I will check existing AIR bugs and add some some appropriate sub components, soon. After some basic change help of AIR users will be appreciated, that does not run on my prehistoric Android 2.1 tablet, so that I have no own experience. For example: do we have some help in that App leading to the BSA? And BTW: we should use UTC times instead of yesterday and similar, in a worldwide project those time zone related info can be worrying for people who do not know where wirder lives. @all Please do not start discussions in the Bugzilla administration info log. Please excuse me for the carelessness, CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] BUGZILLAASSISTANT broken due to nbsp in Component names
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: And after that I added a new mistake with the nbsp; due to obsolete private notes (without thinking about them), some (long) time ago that was necessary with oLder Wikimedia for getting some templates working. Hi, with OLDER Wikimedia, of course. And I will have to do some further tests, see https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=QA-FAQdiff=64999oldid=64998 (not directly related to BSA, but shows some Wikimedia vulnerabilities). CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] BUGZILLAASSISTANT broken due to nbsp in Component names
Robinson Tryon schrieb: If we're pulling data directly from the wiki and using it for the BSA, should we consider Protecting or semi-Protecting that wiki page? Hi, currently it's a more hypothetical problem, there are no violations, and as you see experience (and may be permissions) is not a guarantee for error free edits. So I believe currently that might be excessive. At the very least we should put a comment or note at the top of the file Yes, good idea, I will add a comment on the pages whenever I edit. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - BUGZILLAASSISTANT
Today I corrected a syntax error in the Wiki https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=BugReport_Detailsdiff=prevoldid=64916 Can someone please update the BSA so that that Component will work? CU Rainer P.S.: In this thread I want to keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - deletionrequest
Today I deleted all bugs with Component deletionrequest, what were no real bug reports, but only tests for BSA or other web infrastructure issues (or had to be deleted because of confidential contents). CU Rainer P.S.: This thread should keep you up to date, comments or discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Please consider Bug 61845 - Attachment ODF document recognized as text/plain by auto detect.
Hi all, it seems that Auto Mime Type recognition is completely broken in Bugzilla https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61845. Please always correct mime type if necessary after you attached a file, and please leave a comment in the Bug if your experience is different to mine. Discussion if required please on libreoffice...@lists.freedesktop.org Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice-qa] Please consider Bug 61845 - Attachment ODF document recognized as text/plain by auto detect.
Hi all, it seems that Auto Mime Type recognition is completely broken in Bugzilla https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61845. Please always correct mime type if necessary after you attached a file, and please leave a comment in the Bug if your experience is different to mine. Discussion if required please on libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Should we use the QA Contact field?
Joel Madero schrieb: Hm I have mixed feelings about these requirements. Hi, if you answer to my posting 26.02.2013 21:23 you should refer to https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA-FAQ#What_does_it_mean_if_Bugzilla_Field_QA_Contact_is_not_empty.3F I am thinking about something very simple. Who adds his name in QA Contact tells that he will do some efforts to gain all required info (own contribution and invitations to others) before fixing process can be started. Nothing else. So anybody else knows that'enough to contribute his particular knowledge, the QA Contact will become active if the incoming info is not sufficent. And some details what might be useful to understand that are listed in Wiki Text mentioned above. I do not wan to see a name in QA-Contact with the meaning keep away, I will do all necessary (for that he should ASSIGN the bug to himself) CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Accepting can't open-bugs even if original program fails?
Markus Mohrhard schrieb: Please mark at least the calc ones as NEW and put perf in the whiteboard line. Hi, except it's rather sure that it's simply a damaged document what can't be opened by any software. In all other cases, of course, it's not a crime if we manage it to do a better job than Excel :-) CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] mailing list administration
Today I did some cleanup in the SPAM filters, removed duplicates and invalid mail addresses (it seems the Automatic Moderator functions forward some faked invalid e-mail addresses to the blacklists). CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
WIN Tinderboxes are limping
Hi, I'm urgently waiting for latest Master builds, but unfortunately Tinderboxes do not deliver. @6 shows a lot of red. @7 is green, but builds do not reach the server? [Bug 61482] New: MinGW: Index of /daily/master/Win-x86@7-MinGW shows several empty folders before current https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61482 It would be great if someone could check and repair. Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Should we use the QA Contact field?
bfo schrieb: Adding user (by herself) to QA Contact field would indicate, that this QA person is actively working on the bug and is responsible either for Hi, I added a draft with these ideas in the Wiki https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA-FAQ#What_does_it_mean_if_Bugzilla_Field_QA_Contact_is_not_empty.3F Please follow up if you think it's necessary! Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] Sounds have been removed from LibO
Hi all, I just learned that as fix for Bug 48549 - System::Beep() removal https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48549 by commit http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/binfilter/commit/?id=b4f09b1d25687bc648231f9fd52528d7fd6a053c sounds have been removed from LibreOffice. I can't see any thoughts concerning possible ACCESSIBILITY impact there in the bug. So, if necessary, can you please leave some statements there? And may be also in Bug 58807 - No sound with statement beep https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58807? Discussion please on accessibil...@global.libreoffice.org! Best regards Rainer Bielefeld (QA Volunteer) ___ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] EasyHack proposals
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: But to be honest, it's long ago that I read the HeasHack Wiki page, Well, currently there on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/EasyHacks#Creating_new_EasyHacks I read New EasyHacks should be created by developers ... Write EasyHack (or ProposedEasyHack) ... I do not think that that is very useful, IMHO to imprecise! My suggestions: Whiteboard - We have 2 accepted Whiteboard tags: EasyHack and ProposedEasyHack, IMHO we should use tem as following: * ProposedEasyHack: added by experienced QA users or developers, if applicable with skills. Will be rejected by a developer if too difficult or * EasyHack: Replaces ProposedEasyHack, only added by developers who really can estimate the easiness, and only if a developer is in CC (or can be added) who can be mentor. If there are no concerns or different suggestions and nobody else does I will complete the Wiki text. Proceeding: --- We need a proceeding how to track success. Currently I count 43 ProposedEasyHack Bugs without any action within 1/4 years [1]. Best would be if some willing mentors check these bugs whether really EH. We need experienced QA staff who actively encourage new developers (especially who already did an EasyHack fix) to try more fixes. I already planned to do so, but Developers' feedback es required, for example whether tat is useful or whether mentoring costs too much time or whatever. I suggest to continue discussion with all interested people ONLY on libreoffice...@lists.freedesktop.org. Best regards Rainer Hyperlinks -- [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsedlist_id=236007o1=greaterthanresolution=---status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrquery_format=advancedstatus_whiteboard=ProposedEasyHackbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWbug_status=REOPENEDbug_status=NEEDINFObug_status=PLEASETESTv1=90product=LibreOffice ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: New test to automatically importing all bugzilla documents
Markus Mohrhard schrieb: so after much work the idea to automatically import all bugzilla files was succesful. Hi Markus, that's GREAT! Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [Libreoffice-ux-advise] EasyHack proposals
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: But to be honest, it's long ago that I read the HeasHack Wiki page, Well, currently there on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/EasyHacks#Creating_new_EasyHacks I read New EasyHacks should be created by developers ... Write EasyHack (or ProposedEasyHack) ... I do not think that that is very useful, IMHO to imprecise! My suggestions: Whiteboard - We have 2 accepted Whiteboard tags: EasyHack and ProposedEasyHack, IMHO we should use tem as following: * ProposedEasyHack: added by experienced QA users or developers, if applicable with skills. Will be rejected by a developer if too difficult or * EasyHack: Replaces ProposedEasyHack, only added by developers who really can estimate the easiness, and only if a developer is in CC (or can be added) who can be mentor. If there are no concerns or different suggestions and nobody else does I will complete the Wiki text. Proceeding: --- We need a proceeding how to track success. Currently I count 43 ProposedEasyHack Bugs without any action within 1/4 years [1]. Best would be if some willing mentors check these bugs whether really EH. We need experienced QA staff who actively encourage new developers (especially who already did an EasyHack fix) to try more fixes. I already planned to do so, but Developers' feedback es required, for example whether tat is useful or whether mentoring costs too much time or whatever. I suggest to continue discussion with all interested people ONLY on libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org. Best regards Rainer Hyperlinks -- [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsedlist_id=236007o1=greaterthanresolution=---status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrquery_format=advancedstatus_whiteboard=ProposedEasyHackbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWbug_status=REOPENEDbug_status=NEEDINFObug_status=PLEASETESTv1=90product=LibreOffice ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] EasyHack proposals
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: But to be honest, it's long ago that I read the HeasHack Wiki page, Well, currently there on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/EasyHacks#Creating_new_EasyHacks I read New EasyHacks should be created by developers ... Write EasyHack (or ProposedEasyHack) ... I do not think that that is very useful, IMHO to imprecise! My suggestions: Whiteboard - We have 2 accepted Whiteboard tags: EasyHack and ProposedEasyHack, IMHO we should use tem as following: * ProposedEasyHack: added by experienced QA users or developers, if applicable with skills. Will be rejected by a developer if too difficult or * EasyHack: Replaces ProposedEasyHack, only added by developers who really can estimate the easiness, and only if a developer is in CC (or can be added) who can be mentor. If there are no concerns or different suggestions and nobody else does I will complete the Wiki text. Proceeding: --- We need a proceeding how to track success. Currently I count 43 ProposedEasyHack Bugs without any action within 1/4 years [1]. Best would be if some willing mentors check these bugs whether really EH. We need experienced QA staff who actively encourage new developers (especially who already did an EasyHack fix) to try more fixes. I already planned to do so, but Developers' feedback es required, for example whether tat is useful or whether mentoring costs too much time or whatever. I suggest to continue discussion with all interested people ONLY on libreoffice...@lists.freedesktop.org. Best regards Rainer Hyperlinks -- [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsedlist_id=236007o1=greaterthanresolution=---status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrquery_format=advancedstatus_whiteboard=ProposedEasyHackbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWbug_status=REOPENEDbug_status=NEEDINFObug_status=PLEASETESTv1=90product=LibreOffice ___ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] EasyHack proposals
Michael Meeks schrieb: Incidentally - this is really important work ! :-) we always need new easy-hacks, and to have lots in the area of UI improvement is really a great way to get new UI interested hackers into the project. Hi Michael, Mirek, +1 My experience (I heard from those who tried) is that UI hacks are a good way to get familiar with the code. My suggestion for Mirek: If there are no concerns from elsewhere, please add the ProposedHeasyHack tag immediately to the whiteboard (with additional skills tags), optimum with a developer who might be willing to be mentor in CC. That will save time compared to a proceeding where we first suggest to discuss whether we should ... ;-) But to be honest, it's long ago that I read the HeasHack Wiki page, I should do soon to check what the current opinion is. Best Regards Rainer ___ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
Re: mingw build is currently broken
Andras Timar schrieb: I moved the SyntaxHighlighter class to comphelper (c16e9f4ed97f65357e9986f46ad88ee9f2237997). MinGW tinderbox is green again. Hi András, thank you for the fix, indeed, we get new builds. But the bad thing is, the last MinGW build that was at least a little useful I saw 1 year ago (or so). For example, build in master~2013-02-17_08.19.43_LibO-Dev_4.1.0.0.alpha0_Win_x86_archive terminates launch with a C++ Rungime Lib error message. Is it useful to report such MinGW problems? It seems currently the Tinderbox produces builds nobody cares. Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info
Today I deleted all bugs with Component deletionrequest, what were no real bug reports, but only tests for BSA or other web infrastructure issues. CU Rainer P.S.: This thread should keep you up to date, comments or discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla Integration of Impress remote control - Related problems
Hi, I believe we should take the chance to find solutions for other Products / Components / Subcomponents what currently are a little misplaced in the Current Bugzilla Product structure: BUGZILLAASSISTANT Has not much to do with component WEB, where it currently is placed INSTALLER GUI Florians Tool is similar to an extension, but not really the same ... CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla Integration of Impress remote control - Related problems - BUGZILLAASSISTANT
Hi Rob, Hi Marc, if I remember correctly Marc complained that WWW is not a very good Bugzilla Component for BSA related issues, and at least I agree with that assessment. May be following the discussion here will bring up some better ideas? Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla Integration of Impress remote control - Related problems - BUGZILLAASSISTANT
Marc Paré schrieb: My comment on the BSA Bugzilla component was that, when a bug was filed for the BSA, that an email/post was sent to the website team. Hi Marc, Ah, yes now I remember, THAT was the problem. I also think that that's not optimum, in more than 90% web team can not help. Unfortunately it's not easy to solve that, thos e-mail setting tricks only work for Bugzilla Components, not for Sub Components. And we can't exclude the BSA, the current mailing proceeding can only be done for all new WWW bugs. I do not believe that this one is a big problem, but if it is painful we will have to take the BSA from the WWW component. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla Integration of Impress remote control - Versions
Marc Paré wrote: So, to me, from a user's point of view, I would expect to see the Impress remote in the Presentation component. It would be the natural place for me to seek. I don't believe that it would be any more advantageous to put the Impress remote as a top component. Hi everyone, I think that's a matter of dev. intensity for the Impress remote control. If we have some huge intensity for few weeks, and then only some smaller bugfixes from time to time, that might be the appropriate solution; most problems will be some communication issues between remote control and Impress. But If there will be a continuous further development with lots of enhancements and whatever at the Android side, the Impress RC would be a foreign body in the Impress Component, and we would need a different solution. Can someone invite Impress RC developers to add some ideas? I haven't a clue who those might be. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] What are the requirements to set a bug to NEW
Robert Großkopf schrieb: Hi Robert, the general condition for NEW is that information the Bug report is complete and reliable so that a developer can start with hacking without need to do additional basic research. The most important info is short, but clear instruction how to reproduce the problem We have some brief hints here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugTriage#Set_Status_.26_Prioritize what should get some more detailed completion on QA-FAQ with some kind of check list, I will start a draft next days. So I completely agree with your concerns and Joren's notes concerning Bug 60217: we need more info there. Although we have some tendency to to lower the bar for NEW because there is some danger that a Bug too often becomes visited without possibility to add more info (where a developer might be able to find out the missing info very quickly), a clear instruction is mandatory. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugs and Fixed Resolved Closed status
Marc Paré schrieb: I was wondering, would it be possible to make it so that when a bug has reached the status of Fixed and/or Resolves and/or Closed, Hi Marc, I think the way how that can be done most easily is that someone who maintains the bugs.freedesktop.org account for the mailing list adapts the mail preferences (checks 'Get mail when The bug is resolved or reopened'. For needs what can not be fulfilled by list owners please simply submit a LibO-WWW-Bugzilla bug with Importance enhancement. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] Bug 56973 - UI: Copy / Paste sole sheet of a spreadsheet wrongly looks inactive
Hi, I have a design question in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56973. Is there any style guideline concerning items greyed out in UI? Sometimes we have check boxes greyed out with a checkmark, and it means Check is mandatory because of other properties, you can't unselect it. For example A) Sometimes there are items with no influence in the current situation, there greyed out means Does not matter B) In Draw menu 'Format - Position and Size - Protect Size.' If you select 'Protect position', 'Protect Size' will be checked automatically and is greyed out because you can not modify this. My opinion: a) Do not show checkboxes without function - so remove inactive items from Draw menu 'Format - Text - Text' b) Show checkbox and ittem text greyed out if shown status is mandatory c) Radibuttons: Show selectable and/or selected status in normal black, only positions what can not be selected in Grey. For example in the bug that might be not important, but for selections with more than 2 button positions to me this seems most intuitive. For example see Print dialog, there are 3 radio button positions, and Selection is greyed out and inactive if nothing is selected in document. So it seems consequent to me to show the mandatory position in normal black and the impossible one greyed out if only 2 positions are in the dialog. Are there any UI style guidlines for this? Can you please leave a conclusion in the Bug? CU Rainer ___ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
[Libreoffice-qa] Target information for Status WORKSFORME
Hi Since 2012 I generally add a target info in parenthesis to Bug reports where the problem vanished and it is not known where exactly the problem vanished [1] The advantages of this method: * Common target:X.Y.Z query string * Parenthesis shows that there is some unsureness concerning accuracy of that Version statement. It seems that this proceeding is unknown or not common sense (or simply have been marked WFM before that parenthesis idea appeared), we have more WFM bugs with target without parentheses [2]. Currently I prefer not to use different information concerning the version were the bug has been fixed [4], because that would make queries more difficult I added some more precise hints in the wiki [3]. Please consider that text as a suggestion and feel free to modify that text it you think you have a better idea. Best Regards Rainer Hyperlinks: [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=status_whiteboardlist_id=227347o1=casesubstringresolution=WORKSFORMEo2=notsubstringstatus_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrquery_format=advancedstatus_whiteboard=%28target%3Av1=%29v2=%29product=LibreOffice [2] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=status_whiteboardlist_id=227346o1=notsubstringresolution=WORKSFORMEo2=notsubstringstatus_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrquery_format=advancedf2=status_whiteboardstatus_whiteboard=target%3Av1=%28v2=%29product=LibreOffice [3] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=BugReport_Detailsdiff=62665oldid=60784 [4] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60162#c3 ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Stagnant NEEDINFO bugs
Hi all, I had the plan to write down some thoughts concerning your plans to do an other mass close, but I wasn't in the mood to do that. Due to my experience with bug wrangling in general and similar actions we did in LibO Bugzilla, for my personal work I only expect (smaller) complications, and I am very very doubtful that we will get any benefit at all of such an action. So I don not want to waste my spare time for an action what seems to be completely useless ore even damaging to me. You already did lots of discussion concerning details of proceeding, but I can't see any reasoning for what a mass close might be useful. I will not invest any time for this action until I hear at least 1 passably conclusive argument concerning fair and checkable benefit the project and / or my (or other power bugwranglers') work will receive by such a mass close. This https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/NeedinfoClosure#Why_we_aredoing this? is not an argument. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Review 4-0, 4-0-0] Use diskette icons for saving again
Stefan Knorr schrieb: Find the rationale Hi, although I understand your reasons: there also were concerns to live on the ground instead of on trees, and in Germany we had a long discussion whether we shouldn't keep the steam engine on traffic signs http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:BueFrance.JPGfiletimestamp=20080506161906. You know how these things ended, and I prefer to be one of the few discredited pioneers instead to stay in the big crowd ;-) But of course I can live with the old icon. CU Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugs with assignee but status NEW
Hi, I did some emphasis on QA-FAQ https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA-FAQ#How_to_assign_a_bug_.28QA_team_only.29. I found out that currently we have more than 300 bugs with assignee but status UNCONFIRMED or NEW [1], most assigned to cedric.bosdonnat@free.fr, tbehr...@suse.com, r...@novell.com, nopo...@novell.com, vmik...@suse.cz [2] That is not a big problem, but inconsistent. I am not a fan of mass changes, but could assignees please unify the properties in these bugs by the fly when they stumble upon them and + change Stauts to Assigned if they are planning to work on the bugs or + reassign to list? Especially for bugs where we did not have any change since more than 1/4 year [3] my suspect is that Assignee entry is inappropriate and only might discourage other volunteers Best Regards Rainer Hyperlinks: --- [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=bug_statuslist_id=222668o1=notequalsemailtype1=notequalsemailassigned_to1=1query_format=advancedbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWemail1=libreoffice-bugs%40lists.freedesktop.orgv1=ASSIGNEDcomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters%20and%20storagecomponent=Formula%20Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics%20stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing%20and%20PDF%20exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWproduct=LibreOffice [2] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=y_axis_field=assigned_toz_axis_field=query_format=report-tableshort_desc_type=allwordssubstrshort_desc=product=LibreOfficecomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters+and+storagecomponent=Formula+Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics+stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing+and+PDF+exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWlongdesc_type=allwordssubstrlongdesc=bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstrbug_file_loc=status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstrstatus_whiteboard=keywords_type=allwordskeywords=bug_id=bug_id_type=anyexactemailassigned_to1=1emailtype1=notequalsemail1=libreoffice-bugs%40lists.freedesktop.orgemailtype2=substr ingema il2=emailtype3=substringemail3=chfieldvalue=chfieldfrom=chfieldto=Nowj_top=ANDf1=noopo1=noopv1=format=tableaction=wrap [3] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=bug_statuslist_id=222682o1=notequalsemailtype1=notequalso2=greaterthanchfieldto=-92dquery_format=advancedemailassigned_to1=1chfield=assigned_tochfieldfrom=-600df2=days_elapsedbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWemail1=libreoffice-bugs%40lists.freedesktop.orgv1=ASSIGNEDcomponent=BASICcomponent=Chartcomponent=contribcomponent=Databasecomponent=Documentationcomponent=Drawingcomponent=Extensionscomponent=filters%20and%20storagecomponent=Formula%20Editorcomponent=frameworkcomponent=graphics%20stackcomponent=Installationcomponent=Libreofficecomponent=Linguisticcomponent=Localizationcomponent=Presentationcomponent=Printing%20and%20PDF%20exportcomponent=sdkcomponent=Spreadsheetcomponent=UIcomponent=Writercomponent=WWWv2=90product=LibreOffice ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Stagnant NEEDINFO bugs
Petr Mladek schrieb: This will cause many mails only in the first round. It will be normal level of mails if we do this regularly. Hi, That's an illusion, total number of mails will always be the the same. Only the number of mails per cleanup will be smaller. BTW, I dislike the noise the discussed 3 strikes solution will cause. I'm thinking about a different solution: Strike 1: Query will find NEEDINFO bugs untouched for a long time and fulfilling some additional hopeless criteria. Reporter's of these bugs will get polite mail with request to contribute additional info that we will have to close the bug without additional info. This mailing only send mails to reporters, will not change any info in the Bugs, so that data as Days since last change and similar will be available for other queries. List of related bugs will be published on QA list That's not a big technical challenge, I think I can create required tools (what can be used fur further actions in future easily) within 1 hour. Strike 2 After 7 Days: Query for all Bugs for what mails have been sent in Strike 1: - Changed since mail (probably by reporter): QA will take care - NOT changed: Mass close via Bugzilla with polite message Sorry ..., but feel free to reopen if ... What do think? BTW, I would not do that too often. Sometimes it's simply not easy for reporter to contribute desired info, for example because bug is not simple to reproduce. May be such bugs can be marked by entry of a QA Mentor in QA contact or similar. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] installing 400rc2 parallel on Windows - no way to choose extensions ?
Andras Timar schrieb: Yes, it is. With msiexec /a you convert the install kit from one format to another. It is not an installation Hi, Yes, but I wonder what can be done with the .msi above the program folder? I am pretty sure that I was involved in a discussion concerning reasons of that .msi, but I forgot all results. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] Bugs with assignee but status NEW
Hi Kohei, I see that you changed status of several bugs [1] with you as assignee from status ASSIGNED to NEW. My interpretation is that you are intending to do some work on it, but currently that particular Bug is far at the end of your priority list and you are not planning activity in nearby future? Please leave a brief note here concerning your intentions, and may be we should leave a note in the Wiki at QA/BugTriage [1], How to Report Bugs in LibreOffice [3] or similar to avoid unnecessary ambiguity and checking ups in the bugs? Best Regards Rainer Hyperlinks: [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?list_id=216565emailtype1=exactchfieldto=2013-01-26query_format=advancedemailassigned_to1=1chfield=bug_statuschfieldfrom=2013-01-24chfieldvalue=NEWemail1=kohei.yoshida%40suse.deproduct=LibreOffice [2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugTriage [3] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugs with assignee but status NEW
Kohei Yoshida schrieb: No, those bugs were assigned to me originally by someone else, as part of the very old workflow. I had no plan to work on them in the first place. Hi Kohei, yes, you are completely right, those assignations were a legacy, and it's a useful clearing up for those bugs to change the status if you do not plan to work on them in near future. Actually, I could go a step further and change the assignee of these bugs with status NEW to the default assignee to further remove ambiguity, It was the the core of my question whether you wanted to have those Bug in some kind of abeyance between NEW and ASSIGNED. I think currently we do it so that bugs with Status ASSIGNED always have an assignee different from libreoffice-b...@lists.freedesktop.org, and un-ASSIGNED have the default assignee. So - if we do not see concerns here - I would appreciate to follow your suggestion to change to the default assignees of the not fixed Bugs in the query. That might encourage volunteers to engage. Without new arguments here I will add some more precise hints in the Wiki on monday. Thanks and best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] SSL problem?
Hi all, it seems there is a ssl problem with connections to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ and may be other services? Every time when I attempt to reach the site I get errorcode: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long That's with all my browsers and reproduced by at least 1 other user, so I think the problem is at freedesktop.org. Servers work, I can post Bugzilla comments via Mail interface. I hope this helps, thank you for your great service. Best Regards Rainer Bielefeld (LibO QA Volunteer) ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] SSL problem?
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: it seems there is a ssl problem with connections to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ and may be other services? Hi, at least Bugzilla is back, thank you. Best Regards Rainer Bielefeld ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Version number for 4.0 RC2
klaus-jürgen weghorn ol schrieb: Hi, BTW, I prefer to submit a Bug for something like that without asking here in very most cases: If it's a bug you saved your time to ask and someone other's to answer. If it's not a bug someone else not subscribed to the list here will submit a bug because he can't know that it's NOTABUG. So it's much more effective to risk a NOTABUG for the report, and the advantage is that anybody stumbling upon that effect can see all discussion and reason why that's NOTABUG. Best Regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013
julien2412 schrieb: I read quickly this thread, Hello Julien, thx, for feedback, I believe for for further discussion of possibly necessary rethinking of current or planned proceeding we should start a new thread on libreoffice...@lists.freedesktop.org, here we might discommode devs' workflow. CU Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013
julien2412 schrieb: I read quickly this thread, Hello Julien, thx, for feedback, I believe for for further discussion of possibly necessary rethinking of current or planned proceeding we should start a new thread on libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org, here we might discommode devs' workflow. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013
Joel Madero schrieb: -Status clarification (New vs. Reopened) **Agreed: *Reopened should only be used if the bug is assigned *Because of this agreement, modifications have to be made to our current workflow -*Agreed: *NEEDINFO: Used only if most the information Hi all, just stumbled upon these minutes. Most of these decisions are changes of proceeding negotiated in the past, and so the Wiki should be amended to these changes. With some results I agree, may some fine tuning still is possible. So I agree that it's appropriate to mark a report INVALID if nearby no useful info is included (as stated in the minutes). For a NEEDINFO I do not believe that Most necessary info has to be included. For me a promising start seems enough reason to keep a bug open with NEEDINFO. May be we can find and write down some indications for promising, but most is a matter or instinct to decide whether there is hope Concerning the rest, to be honest, with current knowledge I don't understand most of that what I read because I nowhere see a because What were the problems that should be solved with the decisions? I am afraid that the new definitions will no longer allow reliable queries. An example: In this http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.6/en/html/lifecycle.html graph, what was base of former decisions, NEW meant all necessary has been gained, QA work is done, developers can start their work. So no need for me to have a look. I think that was a useful usage of Status NEW. Due to agreed items now NEW should be selected immediately if someone who is more or less reliable has reported or confirmed a real bug. I saw Joel changing Status of several bugs I reported from UNCONFIRMED to NEW without any additional contribution of information. Thank you for trusting my reports, but I have good reasons NOT to use NEW at once: I think that additional information should be added, may be I want to do further research, may be I would like to see whether the problem is limited to my OS The result of the new proceeding is that nobody can know whether more info is necessary or at least might be useful (Other OS? Particular conditions / settings / Desktop integration / ...? Where did that problem start? Are there relations to other bugs what should be checked?). There are good reasons to follow the 2 man rule http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule, it's not only a matter of confirmation, the reviewer should add information from his point of view. I'm sorry, to me that looks a little helter skelter. A more promising way to develop the proceedings would be to list existing problems and suggestions for solutions on the wiki discussion pages like https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Talk:QA/BugTriage and then to improve the proceeding rules step by step with parallel discussion on qa-list. CU Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013
Joel Madero schrieb: -Status clarification (New vs. Reopened) **Agreed: *Reopened should only be used if the bug is assigned *Because of this agreement, modifications have to be made to our current workflow -*Agreed: *NEEDINFO: Used only if most the information Hi all, just stumbled upon these minutes. Most of these decisions are changes of proceeding negotiated in the past, and so the Wiki should be amended to these changes. With some results I agree, may some fine tuning still is possible. So I agree that it's appropriate to mark a report INVALID if nearby no useful info is included (as stated in the minutes). For a NEEDINFO I do not believe that Most necessary info has to be included. For me a promising start seems enough reason to keep a bug open with NEEDINFO. May be we can find and write down some indications for promising, but most is a matter or instinct to decide whether there is hope Concerning the rest, to be honest, with current knowledge I don't understand most of that what I read because I nowhere see a because What were the problems that should be solved with the decisions? I am afraid that the new definitions will no longer allow reliable queries. An example: In this http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.6/en/html/lifecycle.html graph, what was base of former decisions, NEW meant all necessary has been gained, QA work is done, developers can start their work. So no need for me to have a look. I think that was a useful usage of Status NEW. Due to agreed items now NEW should be selected immediately if someone who is more or less reliable has reported or confirmed a real bug. I saw Joel changing Status of several bugs I reported from UNCONFIRMED to NEW without any additional contribution of information. Thank you for trusting my reports, but I have good reasons NOT to use NEW at once: I think that additional information should be added, may be I want to do further research, may be I would like to see whether the problem is limited to my OS The result of the new proceeding is that nobody can know whether more info is necessary or at least might be useful (Other OS? Particular conditions / settings / Desktop integration / ...? Where did that problem start? Are there relations to other bugs what should be checked?). There are good reasons to follow the 2 man rule http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule, it's not only a matter of confirmation, the reviewer should add information from his point of view. I'm sorry, to me that looks a little helter skelter. A more promising way to develop the proceedings would be to list existing problems and suggestions for solutions on the wiki discussion pages like https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Talk:QA/BugTriage and then to improve the proceeding rules step by step with parallel discussion on qa-list. CU Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla administration info - New version 3.6.5.2 rc
Today I added new version 3.6.5.2 rc to Bugzilla version picker. Hi Joel, sorry, please update BSA CU Rainer P.S.: This thread should keep you up to date, discussion if desired please in extra threads to keep this one clear and short. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Spam on this mailing list
Dan Lewis schrieb: Can someone do something about the spam that is being sent to libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org? Hi, yes, and we are doing, but a Spam filter never becomes ready ... . CU Rainer Bielefeld ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] Bug 59570 - UI: Make Number Changing slider more intuitive
Hi, may be you can leave some comments in a.m. bug? https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59570 Thank you and best regards Rainer Bielefeld (QA-volunteer) ___ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
Re: About Developing
mohamed riyaz schrieb: i'm a university student. i need to customize libreoffice in to my mother language sinhala. Hi, Welcome! LibO has a well working Sinhala Version, please see https://www.libreoffice.org/download/?type=win-x86lang=siversion=4.0.0 For general localization info please see https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice_Localization_Guide and similar info! The Document Foundation හි සිංහල විකිය- Sinhala (si) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/SI/Main_Page/ unfortunately does not have much contents, but I think user https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Danishka can help you with more advice. You should join the Sinhala Language Team, please see https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Language_Teams. Here you are wrong! Best regards Rainer Bielefeld (QA-Volunteer) ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Bug Status NEW but Assigned to Someone - Please Change
Kohei Yoshida schrieb: Hi all, I think I understand Joel's intention. I also have problems to find out whether a bug already is under observation of a developer (because he is in CC), that was more easy in the early time with very few developers. And I believe developers should become involved when all necessary info is in the report. So I also see some advantages (concerning queries) to add a developer to the Assigned to field. But on the other hand, that might discourage volunteers (for EasyHacks and similar), and developers might feel pressed to start work on that particular bug. Most engraving disadvantage of changing the current proceeding is that it is a change of the current proceeding ;-) It always takes long time with lots of discussion until new proceeding will be accepted. So I agree with Kohei, we should not modify this if we do not have very good reasons with really promising prospects for benefit. Of course, if someone has ideas here, we should discuss that (may be better on qa list?). And - Thanks to Calc Team for reliably handling the bugzilla dashboard concerning Assignee, Target, ... . This eases our (at least my) work very much. Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: About Developing
Norbert Thiebaud schrieb: This is the wrong list for localization work... Hi Norbert, yes, that's exactly what I wanted to say :-) CU Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug Status NEW but Assigned to Someone - Please Change
Kohei Yoshida schrieb: Hi all, I think I understand Joel's intention. I also have problems to find out whether a bug already is under observation of a developer (because he is in CC), that was more easy in the early time with very few developers. And I believe developers should become involved when all necessary info is in the report. So I also see some advantages (concerning queries) to add a developer to the Assigned to field. But on the other hand, that might discourage volunteers (for EasyHacks and similar), and developers might feel pressed to start work on that particular bug. Most engraving disadvantage of changing the current proceeding is that it is a change of the current proceeding ;-) It always takes long time with lots of discussion until new proceeding will be accepted. So I agree with Kohei, we should not modify this if we do not have very good reasons with really promising prospects for benefit. Of course, if someone has ideas here, we should discuss that (may be better on qa list?). And - Thanks to Calc Team for reliably handling the bugzilla dashboard concerning Assignee, Target, ... . This eases our (at least my) work very much. Best regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [ANN] LibreOffice 4.0.0.1 RC1 available
Hi all, I hoped to be able to do lots of tests with 4.0.0.1, but I see a horrible number of crashes under WIN without any common characteristic, I can't use this version furthermore for anything similar to normal work. Any chance that someone suffering from similar problems can contribute Crash Reports? Best Regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
