[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 129806] [META] Feature "not implemented on platform X"

2020-01-21 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806

Thomas Lendo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|[META] - Feature "not   |[META] Feature "not
   |implemented on platform X"  |implemented on platform X"
 CC||thomas.le...@gmail.com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs


[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 129806] [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"

2020-01-06 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806

--- Comment #4 from Mike Kaganski  ---
(In reply to Olivier Hallot from comment #2)
> The point in adding to the Help is the maintenance work to keep contents
> precise and updated. 
> 
> Suppose that the issue on WIN/ssh is fixed someday. Who will pick the right
> Help pages and correct its contents? Or, how to let Help maintainers know
> the issue is fixed/implemented/whatever? It seems hard to me to traverse
> Help pages checking for bugs fixed or new features.

The same is true for anything: imagine we have help pages for, say, print
dialog; and then GSoC suddenly introduced a new version of the dialog. What
would be the difference in this case?

I see tremendous progress in our help in recent years thanks to your brilliant
work. In AskLibO, I always post links to the related help pages when I know
them. And you know what: I see increasing number of such links from others; and
direct comments like "the help system is really useful" (I need to have a habit
to notify you of such things). It's only possible because help becomes
relevant. This request is another way of *helping* users, which is the point of
help, isn't it?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs


[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 129806] [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"

2020-01-06 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806

--- Comment #3 from Mike Kaganski  ---
(In reply to Olivier Hallot from comment #2)
> I wonder if we can implement an extra field in bugzilla bug report to
> indicate the associated help pages to touch. Either way, it is a hard and
> time consuming job.

It would be awesome; but in the mean time, simply mentioning a commit with the
changes, or a list of pages, in the comments - as in comment 0 - will do IMO.

> Another drawback is more in the marketing side... It looks bad for a
> product/software to let user know it is broken, even on the weirdest corner
> case. Better let user discover bugs by him/herself.

Strongly disagree. Not implemented state is not a bug, but a missing feature -
and the bug is bad documentation which suggests users trying what is *not
supposed to work*. While documenting bugs in help would be even wrong because
of ever-changing state of the bug - the help must reflect the intended, correct
operation of the software (and any non-conformance of software behaviour to
what is in help is a bug that should prompt for a report); and "ssh is not
expected to work on Windows" is the correct status of the feature.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs


[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 129806] [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"

2020-01-06 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806

--- Comment #2 from Olivier Hallot  ---
The point in adding to the Help is the maintenance work to keep contents
precise and updated. 

Suppose that the issue on WIN/ssh is fixed someday. Who will pick the right
Help pages and correct its contents? Or, how to let Help maintainers know the
issue is fixed/implemented/whatever? It seems hard to me to traverse Help pages
checking for bugs fixed or new features. Very few dev's and QA volunteers care
to report changes in the Help, but those who do are my heroes.

I wonder if we can implement an extra field in bugzilla bug report to indicate
the associated help pages to touch. Either way, it is a hard and time consuming
job.

Another drawback is more in the marketing side... It looks bad for a
product/software to let user know it is broken, even on the weirdest corner
case. Better let user discover bugs by him/herself. Some companies publish the
"known bugs" list at release time, but that not so often to see nowadays (and
very few read it).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs


[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 129806] [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"

2020-01-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|META - Document "not|[META] - Feature "not
   |implemented on platform X"  |implemented on platform X"
   |state of features   |

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs