Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Internal Updater
I don't find this that useful. Unless the internal updater starts using differential updates (which would be great), I think it's better to just open the download site in a browser. On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I know we've discussed this already a few times - both within ESC and within the QA call but I wanted to get a better sense of what is needed to move forward with getting it fixed. FWIW I've closed 3 bugs this at least tangentially related to the subject. So - from what I understand the entire updater is just broken, when you get a notification that there is a new version you click it and it just takes you to the website where additional clicks are needed to download, and then more to install. QA has discussed this a few times and generally I think we've come up with a roadmap of what would be ideal but I know that it will require others to implement so I'm not trying to push this onto any developer just curious how (if at all) we can get it fixed. Phase I: Fix what is already there - currently you can go to Help - Check for Updates and there is a Install button that is always inactive. How much work would it take to at least fix that? If this will never get fixed (or be a long time) I think we should remove the button as it just reminds users about a broken feature that has been broken for a long time already. FWIW here I think we need to be clearer about what it means to check for update because it's based on what branch you are on Phase II: Add new options to allow a user to select the branch they want (fresh/stable/pre-release) and then another option to either download only or download and install which would automatically either download to a folder or download and install upon release. I think Phase II would be an amazing addition that would be kind of one of those big things we could run some PR about during a major release. Like I said - not pushing this on anyone, just curious where we stand as I see updater related bug reports and enhancement requests and QA has discussed it quite a few times as something that we feel need some love/attention. Best Regards, Joel ___ LibreOffice mailing list libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/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] is fdo#81113 a release blocker for 4.3.0?
Hi, I do not thinks that one blocks the release of 4.3.0. * Although webquery is an important feature, I think not a lot of people use it in Calc to do daily jobs. If they do, they will not use a fresh libreoffice version to do so, they should choose stable versions. * Also, as I mentioned in that bug report, webquery works as expected using macro dispatcher (i.e., it was just broken for the UI run), see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81113#c2 * I think we can say sth in the release notes about this issue (together with some other important issues which were not fixed in time) After all, thanks a lot for the quick fix of this bug! Kevin Suo ? 2014?07?16? 22:16, David Tardon [via Document Foundation Mail Archive] ??: Hi all, Any opinions on $SUBJECT? The bug has got importance highest/critical; unfortunately it was triaged a day too late... Note that this is just one possible manifestation of the problem: the same misdetection (and failure to open the file) can happen whenever a remote file is opened. It depends on whether the file is detected before the Keynote filter is tried. Review for -4-3 is https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/10357 . D. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-Libreoffice-qa-is-fdo-81113-a-release-blocker-for-4-3-0-tp4115754.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.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/
[Libreoffice-qa] Italy UI: Left side of Options dialog in English
Hi all, I think this bug needs some special attention: Bug 80326 - [Missing translation]: Options - left side dialogue aren't translated - Italian version. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80326 The strings on left-side of options dialog are in English since 4.3 rc1, and the same in rc2, and now again in rc3. Those strings have already been translated in pootle long ago: https://translations.documentfoundation.org/it/libo_ui/translate/cui/source/options.po#unit=67912636 Something goes wrong? Kevin Suo -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Italy-UI-Left-side-of-Options-dialog-in-English-tp4116093.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Internal Updater
Khargaroth you coudl actually do one better. have it when download is clicked have it automatically poll the nearest mirror to you and download the installer from within LO and have it auto run and update ones system. not sure though how much work that would be though. We would eliminate the need to load a browser and alot of extra steps currently involved. On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:50 PM, khagaroth khagar...@gmail.com wrote: I don't find this that useful. Unless the internal updater starts using differential updates (which would be great), I think it's better to just open the download site in a browser. On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I know we've discussed this already a few times - both within ESC and within the QA call but I wanted to get a better sense of what is needed to move forward with getting it fixed. FWIW I've closed 3 bugs this at least tangentially related to the subject. So - from what I understand the entire updater is just broken, when you get a notification that there is a new version you click it and it just takes you to the website where additional clicks are needed to download, and then more to install. QA has discussed this a few times and generally I think we've come up with a roadmap of what would be ideal but I know that it will require others to implement so I'm not trying to push this onto any developer just curious how (if at all) we can get it fixed. Phase I: Fix what is already there - currently you can go to Help - Check for Updates and there is a Install button that is always inactive. How much work would it take to at least fix that? If this will never get fixed (or be a long time) I think we should remove the button as it just reminds users about a broken feature that has been broken for a long time already. FWIW here I think we need to be clearer about what it means to check for update because it's based on what branch you are on Phase II: Add new options to allow a user to select the branch they want (fresh/stable/pre-release) and then another option to either download only or download and install which would automatically either download to a folder or download and install upon release. I think Phase II would be an amazing addition that would be kind of one of those big things we could run some PR about during a major release. Like I said - not pushing this on anyone, just curious where we stand as I see updater related bug reports and enhancement requests and QA has discussed it quite a few times as something that we feel need some love/attention. Best Regards, Joel ___ LibreOffice mailing list libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice ___ LibreOffice mailing list libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice -- Jonathan Aquilina ___ 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] What if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?
Hello. Sometimes I meet a situation, when a bug was confirmed for old LibreOffice version but can not be reproduced in new one. In QA/Bugzilla/FAQ (https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/FAQ#How_to_terminate_a_Bug_if_it_can.27t_be_reproduced_any_longer) it is written: “If a bug has been confirmed, but the problem vanished with a later LibreOffice version, do not use Resolved Fixed, what is reserved for bugs with a real reviewed Fix. The appropriate Status for a Bug where the problem simply vanished is Resolved WORKSFORME.” But in some bugreports there is another opinion, for example: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51823 What is current QA-team position? Best regards, Alexandr ___ 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 if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?
Hi, On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:14:52PM +0400, Aleksandr P wrote: What is current QA-team position? If you know why this bug is fixed (as in a developer said: this commit should fix that or used the bug id in a commit message) its RESOLVED/FIXED. If you cannot reproduce the bug anymore but could do so in an earlier version and you have no insight on what fixed this, its WORKSFORME. If you cant reproduce it in a current release without knowing if it was reproducable in earlier releases, use NEEDINFO or INVALID as appropriate. Best, Bjoern ___ 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 if a bug can not be reproduced with newer version?
Hi Aleksandr, What Bjoern said but keep in mind sometimes users aren't happy with this. If a user is requesting a backport to a currently supported version, it's up to QA to decide if it's worth the hassle of finding out the commit that fixed it, poking the developer, and then getting them to backport it (and of course they can always say no). So don't be offended if you say this works fine in 4.3.0.3 rc, you can expect to see a fix in 4.3 release and they come back with this isn't acceptable, please get the fix in 4.2. -- happens quite frequently. Also when you close a bug as WORKSFORME always let the user know what version it works in, suggest they confirm that it works (even in a prerelease) and let them know if they can reproduce on that version or a newer version to put the bug back into UNCONFIRMED (not REOPENED). Thanks for your help! Best, Joel On 07/21/2014 03:57 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:14:52PM +0400, Aleksandr P wrote: What is current QA-team position? If you know why this bug is fixed (as in a developer said: this commit should fix that or used the bug id in a commit message) its RESOLVED/FIXED. If you cannot reproduce the bug anymore but could do so in an earlier version and you have no insight on what fixed this, its WORKSFORME. If you cant reproduce it in a current release without knowing if it was reproducable in earlier releases, use NEEDINFO or INVALID as appropriate. Best, Bjoern ___ 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] Bug Squashing Session in 90 Minutes
Hi All, QA is doing a bug squashing session (confirming/closing bugs) in 90 minutes. Feel free to jump in if you have a spare 10 minutes. http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa We've seen some great progress this past week or so and we're on the border of being the lowest unconfirmed bug count that we've had in over two years. Hope to see some of you in the room. Best, Joel ___ 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-users] Bug Squashing Session in 90 Minutes
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:20:23 +0200, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: Hey Charles, On 07/21/2014 08:23 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hello Joel, Next time please let us know in advance... It was a very last minute thing, got up this morning and saw a few people in the chat and said let's squash some bugs!, decided to announce in case anyone has some time. Best, Joel ___ wow!!! count is 788 right now!!! not bad for a last minute thing!!! thumbs up. ___ 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] Second Opinion Needed
I have closed this bug twice as NOTABUG but the user does not agree so requesting second opinion: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81627 Thanks Best, Joel ___ 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] Second Opinion Needed
Sorry to be long-winded. I am too tired to write shorter. On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 21:19 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I have closed this bug twice as NOTABUG but the user does not agree so requesting second opinion: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81627 That report is FILESAVE: Keystrokes/characters typed while AutoRecovery/Autosave happens aren't registered. When I first saw that behaviour, it impressed me as a bug. It is particularly annoying in two circumstances: (1) Typing without looking at the screen. Yes, some of us still do that, and for good reasons. (2) Working in a large document on an overtaxed computer. It is not that I create large documents; rather it is useful to make notes while working through some else's document. For example, autosave can make me wait over a minute just to type Yup, that works somewhere in the 587 pages of Andrew Pitonyak's OpenOffice.org Macros Explained file:///home/terry/lo_hacking/notes/OOME_3_0.odt. As for the ODF specification ... it is beyond thinking about. The suggested workaround of turning off autosave applies, I think, to everything you do in LibreOffice, not to one document. So, it is more drastic than one would wish. Perhaps a compromise disposition would be to accept the report as a Request For Enhancement. But then we get immediately into the questions: How responsive should the UI be during an autosave? At what cost in programming effort? At what cost in machine usage, remembering that we want a solution for Win too? If LibreOffice merely saves keystrokes for processing after completion of the autosave, the result could be more confusing than the existing situation. I wish I had a clear opinion to offer. I am beginning to remember why I never got around to filing that RFE grin /. Terry. ___ 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/
