Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

Hi klaus-jürgen, all They get their own credit points as you can see on the credit list. It > won't be a direct QA point but it is a counting one. Well, then that list needs to be updated more frequently so that people actually see their name on it after a new release (I find it a little absurd

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Handling confidential bug report supporting documents

Hi Drew, drew wrote (06-02-12 00:35) Noticed on slashdot today that someone was complaining about LibreOffice not being willing to deal with their bug report because they had a document showing the defect (I looked at the issue and suspect it may actually be a duplicate BTW) and according to th

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 15:53 -0800, Pedro wrote: > TDF doesn't give any credit. They do appreciate the work and have mentioned > it several times. Sure - but we need to fix that; for a start it is only polite, you guys do great work, and we should recognise that. > QA people don't write c

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

Am Montag, 6. Februar 2012, 08:43:30 schrieb klaus-jürgen weghorn ol: > Hi Rainer, > > Am 05.02.2012 13:47, schrieb Rainer Bielefeld: > > Hi, > > > > we have some rather reliable Bugzilla statistics for Reporters on > > , Cor knows > > th

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Handling confidential bug report supporting documents

On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 11:19 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: > Hi Drew, > > drew wrote (06-02-12 00:35) > > > Noticed on slashdot today that someone was complaining about LibreOffice > > not being willing to deal with their bug report because they had a > > document showing the defect (I looked at the iss

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

Hi Nino, all Having "false-positives" ist bad, of course. > > But IMO false-negatives are worse :-/ > Couldn't agree more :) There were at least 3 guys that were particularly helpful on the second Bug Hunting Session while I was online (probably there were many more). I thanked them publicly on

[Libreoffice-qa] issues with bugzilla

FYI, filed two issues today: Bug 45693 - Lines from text in description / comments often broken Bug 45717 - notifications from bugzilla-dae...@freedesktop.org send from both PST and from my local time zone Cheers, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org

[Libreoffice-qa] Issues with 3.5.0 - ready for release ...

Hi, As promised to Thorsten on Sunday, I've been looking at 3.5.0 and issues. I looked at issues that I've seen, that are at 37361 and at the 44 issues filed during our second BugHuntSession (little delay :-\ ) Added some comments, added some to bug 37361 etc. Quite some have already been pic

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

Cor Nouws wrote (04-02-12 23:39) Suggestions remarks? Thanks to all for the remarks, ideas. My summary for now: - we could do statistics for submitted bugs and (I hope) for added comments. And then maybe stop at the minimum of 10 ? Another idea that I've got: we can make it an community issu

[Libreoffice-qa] LO 3.5.0.rc3 : deployment, gpo, msi, vc2008, etc.

Hi all, In the FR community, several users said that it is impossible to deploy LO 3.5.0 rc[1|2|3] under MS-Windows-7 using GPO. Did some of you try to do that ? It seems that there is a problem with the fact that the redistributable vc2008 is included in the msi. Best regards. JBF -- Seuls de

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Issues with 3.5.0 - ready for release ...

Cor Nouws wrote (07-02-12 01:08) However, I have no idea if the issues from the last weeks have been spotted / judged consequently and with enough detail (looking at what happened with the issues from January 21 and 22, I have to doubt seriously alas.) So, though the overall impression is OK (as

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LO 3.5.0.rc3 : deployment, gpo, msi, vc2008, etc.

Hi, 2012/2/7 Jean-Baptiste Faure : > Hi all, > > In the FR community, several users said that it is impossible to deploy > LO 3.5.0 rc[1|2|3] under MS-Windows-7 using GPO. > > Did some of you try to do that ? > It seems that there is a problem with the fact that the redistributable > vc2008 is inc