Bjoern Michaelsen píše v St 14. 03. 2012 v 18:38 +0100:
While being open to further concrete proposals for improvement, I dont think
there is a fundamental flaw with the release concept itself. The quality of
3.5.0 and and 3.5.1 show that the number of regressions in 3.4 were a one-time
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:
Fridrich Strba schrieb:
for 3.4.6 RC2, we're now uploading builds to a public (but
non-mirrored - so don't spread news too widely!) place, as soon as
they're available. Grab them here:
If you've a bit of time, please give them a try report
Dag Wieers schrieb:
So it's hard to quantify what 0 reports means, no regressions or no
user-testing ?
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advancedversion=LibO%203.4.6%20RC1product=LibreOffice
CU
Rainer
___
List Name:
Hi Rainer, all
It's my belief that we will have to rethink our release concept.
It is true that this model tends to accumulate regressions. Unfortunately
it is not easy to measure if adding more features is attracting more users
than repelling users because of regressions/unsolved problems...
Hi Pedro,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 05:32:04PM +, Pedro Lino wrote:
Maybe branch 3.4.x should continue to be updated (in the same way that
Mozilla keeps fixing bugs in version 3.6.x, with x currently at 28, even
though the latest version is 11.0...) until at least all 3.3.x regressions
are
Bjoern Michaelsen schrieb:
We need to be sure to detect and pinpoint regressions earlier and more precise
than in 3.4
Hi,
That's at least an important part of the truth, when 3.4.0 release came
only 15 regressions were known (bud keyword handling was very arbitrary
in those days).
Let's
