Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.0.3 RC1 test builds available
With this version Symantec (Norton Internet Security) is not very happy with LibreOffice :-( I get the following notice and will contact Symantec. Dateiname: unicodedata.pyd Bedrohungsname: Suspicious.Cloud.7.F Vollständiger Pfad: c:\program files (x86)\libreoffice 4.0\program\python-core-3.3.0\lib\unicodedata.pyd Details Unbekannte Community-Verbreitung, Unbekanntes Alter, Risiko Hoch Ursprung Heruntergeladen von Unbekannt Aktivität Ausgeführte Aktionen: Ausgeführte Aktionen: 1 Auf Computern ab Nicht verfügbar Zuletzt verwendet 17.04.2013 um 18:24:38 Start-Element Nein Gestarted Nein Unbekannt Es ist nicht bekannt, wie viele Benutzer in der Norton Community diese Datei verwendet haben. Unbekannt Diese Dateiversion ist nicht bekannt. Hoch Das Risiko dieser Datei ist hoch. Art der Bedrohung: Heuristikvirus. Bedrohungserkennung auf der Basis von Malwareheuristiken. Am 17.04.2013 16:18, schrieb Fridrich Strba: Hi *, for the upcoming new version 4.0.3, the RC1 builds now start to be available on pre-releases. This build is slated to be first release candidate build on the way towards 4.0.3, please refer to our release plan timings here: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#4.0.3_release Builds are now being uploaded to a public (but non-mirrored - so don't spread news too widely!) place, as soon as they're available. Grab them here: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/ If you've a bit of time, please give them a try report *critical* bugs not yet in bugzilla here, so we can incorporate them into the release notes. Please note that it takes approximately 24 hours to populate the mirrors, so that's about the time we have to collect feedback. NOTE: This build is in a release configuration and _will_ replace your existing LibreOffice install on Windows. The list of fixed bugs relative to 4.0.2 is here: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugs-libreoffice-4-0-3-release-4.0.3.1.log So playing with the areas touched there also greatly appreciated - and validation that those bugs are really fixed. Thanks a lot for your help, Fridrich ___ 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/ ___ 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] Triaging Goals - Net Minus 10 per Day Against Version 4
Hi guys, I started to go through this list and I can confirm four bugs (see below) where formatting is lost when documents are saved in .doc format. Somehow we still have a problem with this file format which is still a very often used one. I have not looked for duplicates, but my guess is that there could be root cause for this problem. You might want to have a closer look. Best regards, Marc https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63535 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62216 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61956 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63603 Am 15.04.2013 21:20, schrieb Joel Madero: Hi All, I think this is a completely manageable goal and will help ensure the next minor release of 4 is free of blockers. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?list_id=285261query_format=advancedbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDversion=4.0.0.0.alpha0%2B%20Masterversion=4.0.0.0.alpha1version=4.0.0.0.beta1version=4.1.0.0.alpha0%2B%20Masterversion=4.0.0.0.beta2version=4.0.0.1%20rcversion=4.0.0.2%20rcversion=4.0.0.3%20releaseversion=4.0.1.1%20rcversion=4.0.1.2%20releaseversion=4.0.2.1%20rcversion=4.0.2.2%20releaseproduct=LibreOffice Our team has been quite active and got the list down from 260 just Friday (-70 almost), 10 a day net down would mean in less than a month we will be at 0 which would be amazing. Please take 10-15 minutes to look at the list and triage a bug or two. Thanks all! Best, Joel P.S. As always I'll get a short report daily to say YES WE MADE IT! or a plead for more assistance :) -- *Joel Madero* LibreOffice QA Volunteer jmadero@gmail.com mailto:jmadero@gmail.com ___ 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/ ___ 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 Help-Send Feedback BSA
Why not lead people to ask.libreoffice.org? Like Mozilla I can give a quick feedback to http://input.mozilla.org. Whoever is active there should point people to bugzilla if this is really a bug. Maybe most of bad bug descriptions are rather user misunderstandings that can be answered at ask.libreoffice.org. Only my first thought. Marc Am 12.10.2012 10:33, schrieb Nino Novak: Hi Roman, Am 12.10.2012 09:28 schrieb Roman Eisele: Am 11.10.12 19:09, schrieb Marc Paré: I have to agree with Marc that it is currently rather difficult for an “ordinary” user to file his first bug. One could answer here: Our problem is not, that we would not get enough bug reports; at the moment, our problems are a) that we often get bad bug reports and b) that we can’t handle all the bug reports we get. Therefore, one could argue we should maintain the status quo, because the difficulty to file “your first bug report” was good to prevent more “ordinary” users from filing more bad bug reports ;-) However, this view seems a bit cynic to me; therefore I would agree to Marc that it would be nice to make filing bug reports easier, even for “ordinary” users who do not yet have a bugzilla account. I do not know how this can be achieved (the technical side of the problem), but this is probably not a big problem once we have got a consensus about what we want ... So, what is your proposal? Should anonymous bug filing be enabled? (I don't think this is a good idea.) Or should the somewhat complicated process Marc described be improved? And how? A possibility I spontaneously see is to split the button into two: Send Feedback and Report Bug, and to direct people e.g. to the new forum after pressing Send Feedback. So chance is that they are not lost completely. But for the FDO Bugzilla registration process I do not really see how it could be improved. If you don't have an account at FDO, you *have* to register. After registration, you are directed to FDO Bugzilla - as the registration is unaware that you came from BSA. The only possibility I see is to pass this proveniance info to bugzilla registration and let it email you back a BSA link instead of an FDO link with registration confirmation. EasyHack? Nino ___ 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/ ___ 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] Fwd: [2914053]-[LibreOffice]-Software white-list request completed
Symantec put LibreOffice on the whitelist... Best regards, Marc Original-Nachricht Betreff:[2914053]-[LibreOffice]-Software white-list request completed Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 06:18:27 -0700 Von: Software White-List Requests softwarewhite-listreque...@symantec.com An: m...@kaulisch.de m...@kaulisch.de Hello, We are writing in relation to your application through Symantec's on-line Software White-listing Request form for your software LibreOffice. Symantec has decided to add this software to its white-list. The white-list is used in internal quality assurance processes and also by the cloud for some products. This inclusion should reduce the possibility of false positive detections by Symantec products, but Symantec cannot guarantee that false positives will not occur. In the event of continued reports of false positives, please notify us through Symantec's on-line Security Risk/False Positive Dispute Submission form available at: https://submit.symantec.com/dispute. Symantec's decision is not a certification or endorsement of your software in any way, and you are expressly advised by this message that Symantec does not consent to you disclosing that Symantec has added your software to its white-list, or that Symantec has evaluated, endorsed or certified your software in any manner, directly or indirectly. Please note also that decisions made by Symantec are subject to change depending on a variety of factors that include but are not limited to alterations in the software, distribution of the software, or vulnerabilities in the software to misuse by the publisher or others. Symantec may also change its classification criteria and policies over time to address the constantly evolving security landscape. Sincerely, Symantec Security Response http://securityresponse.symantec.com This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication. Thank you. timestamp: 1347465469 ___ 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] RC2 build gets removed by Symantec
Hi folks, I do not know what to do, but I'd like to inform you that Norton Internet Security Suite deleted my LibO_3.6.1.2_Win_x86_install_multi.msi after download because of low reputation of that file. I sent a Whitelist request to Symantec... Marc ___ 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] Cleaning bug list
Hello, may I suggest that this list of eight important points of consideration should be included in this http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage page? For me it would be great if I could have an authorative advise about how to deal with open bugs... Greetings, Marc Am 08.06.2012 12:27, schrieb Jan Holesovsky: Hi Joel, On 2012-06-07 at 23:49 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: 1. If there has been a request for information and there has been no response for 30+ days I'm putting NEEDINFO 2. If two or more people have said that they do not have the bug I'm doing the following if there hasn't been action for 30+ days: a. If it's stated that the bug was fixed in a recent release, I'm putting RESOLVED with a comment that if it's not for the author or someone else to open it back up b. If it's stated that it's not our bug I'm changing status to NOTOURBUG c. If it's stated that it never was a bug I'm putting NOTABUG with a comment saying to open it back up with more information if it is a bug 3. If it's confirmed by other people I'm changing it to confirmed 4. Of course I'm taking a glance at them to see if I can take them on, I've assigned two to myself. 5. If someone appears to be working on the bug and has implicitly or explicitly said they are doing it (ie. it's in progress, almost done, I'll take this one, etc..) I'm changing to assigned and adding a name Thanks so much for this - this is greatly appreciated! I like this approach, and I'd like to ask you for some additional points that would help a lot (if that fits your workflow): 6. If the bug talks about a misbehavior in a document, but the document is missing, NEEDINFO the reporter to provide the document. Similarly, if the bug says something like create document, do this, do that, do another thing, and then when you choose XY, it does AB instead of CD, NEEDINFO the reporter to create such a document, so that the developer can focus only on when you choose XY, it does AB instead of CD. 7. If the bug is a crash on Linux, ask the reporter for a backtrace, if it is not provided yet (unfortunately it is still way too hard to get the backtrace on Windows now) - ideally by pointing to: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport#How_to_get_backtrace_.28on_Linux.29 8. If the bug is a crash, it is a probable candidate to become one of the Most Annoying Bugs; depending on the impact, consider making it dependant on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6 I hope I'm not overstepping, just trying to help as much as possible as it seems like there is a bit of a back log. If this isn't wanted just let me know and I'll cease immediately. The opposite - the more people join this effort, the better! :-) For more co-ordination, I am sure people on libreoffice-qa@ mailing list (CC'd) will help you. Thank you a lot, Kendy ___ 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/ ___ 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] 3.5.1 Online Update testing
Is there a way to tell LibreOfficePortable that it should not show updates although they are not available for the portable version? Marc Am 02.04.2012 17:55, schrieb Jan Holesovsky: Hi Klaus-Jürgen, On 2012-04-02 at 17:14 +0200, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote: Please, is here anybody who can check whether the 3.5.1 Online Update is working? How to test: - install 3.5.1 _RC1_ (for Windows, or other) - trigger Online Update from the Help menu - expected result: LibreOffice reports that there is an update available to 3.5.1 RC2 Please let me know if it worked as expected :-) I now have 3.5.1.2 on WIN8beta but I don't get an update info for 3.5.2RC2. Is this as expected because the 3.5.1RC2 is the final version? This is a great catch - the 3.5.1.2 - 3.5.2.2 is not supposed to be offered yet (3.5.1.2 is final, and we want to keep people updated in the previous final - next final way), but 3.5.2.1 - 3.5.2.2 should have been offered, and was not. It is now fixed - can you please install 3.5.1 RC1 (3.5.1.1), and try Help - Online Update...? It should present you with the availability of RC2. Please keep up the good work, this was an important catch, we really need to ensure that the update service is working all the time, not only from the server side, but even more importantly from the client (LibreOffice) side too. I will come up with a test case how to check it with every LO version (regardless of the version), and will ask you to run that test that with every release. Thank you a lot, Kendy ___ 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/ ___ 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/
