Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA Weekly Report (W42-2016)

[Nino Novak]

Thank you Xisco, for this nice human-readable report!
A real advancement for LibO-QA, I believe :)

Nino

On 24.10.2016 09:34, Xisco Fauli wrote:


What have happened in QA in the last week?  [...]


___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: https://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] [ANN] LibreOffice 5.0.0 RC3 test builds available

[Nino Novak]

Hi Christian,

On 10.07.2015 19:07, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

> The list of fixed bugs relative to 5.0.0 rc2 is here:
> 
> http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugs-libreoffice-5-0-release-5.0.0.3.log

I get a 404 from Apache here -

s/5-0/5-0-0/



:)

Regards,
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] bug #75554

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

just had a glance at #75554 - could not reproduce the hanging, but kind of a
slow rendering of some of the elements in the given test document (they look
like ranges or graphic elements without content - or whatever those white
areas are).

Therefore it seems to take rather long for LibO for initial
rendering/computing the whole document (or whatever LibO does when loading a
file). During this rendering phase, LibO appears a bit "impaired" (slow/no
reaction to keystrokes). Total document length stucks at 68 pages for half a
minute or more, then jumps to 70, stays again for a while, and finally
reaches 150 after several minutes (estimated).

Caution: I tested with 4422 and master from 2015-03-31_09:12:20
(b024e36ddb3b53163d7a01f6f7b5aadb7a858cd9) both Locale: de_DE
*BUT* with OOO_FORCE_DESKTOP=none because of bug # 86636 [1].

So my results are not representative and I won't report them, but rather
thought to discuss them here.

Nino

[1] https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86636

___
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] Advanced Triaging - Tutorials?

[Nino Novak]

On 12.04.2015 21:25, Joel Madero wrote:

> There is a bug that needs some advanced QA work on it and I'm curious if
> anyone wants to take a stab at it and try to document the process
> (including screenshots and/or screen captures).
> 
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75554
> 
> Comment 6 describes what Michael needs.


AFAICS there are three major techniques addressed:

1) bibisecting the problem

2) reducing the document

3) stack tracing with debugging symbols


Techniques 1 + 3 are described in detail in the wiki:

1) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Bibisect

3) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_debug
   and also for Windows:
   https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/How_to_get_a_backtrace_with_WinDbg


Technique 2, reducing the document, should be easy to do IMHO (though
tedious for big/complex documents): just remove all the objects from the
document one by one and at each step look if the problematic behavior is
still reproducible. As a first test, you can copy all contents from the
problematic document into a new document to exclude that there is some
(old/inherited) flaw in the document structure.


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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] DLP Projects as products?

[Nino Novak]

On 13.02.2015 02:02, Robinson Tryon wrote:

> (I made the words BIGGER)
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/enter_bug.cgi

nice :)

The only I'd change is the wording of the titles:

- The projects you are looking for:
+ The projects you are probably looking for:


- These are not the projects you are looking for:
+ There are also several other projects hosted here:


Regards, 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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LIbreOffice 4.3.6 RC2 available

[Nino Novak]

On 11.02.2015 at 23:01, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

> A list of known issues and fixed bugs with 4.3.6 RC2 is available
> from our wiki:
> 
>   http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Releases/4.3.6/RC2

the page is empty.

Regards,
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] New bugzilla instance: Version information

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

browsing through Thommy's UNCO bug list I felt the wish to know which was the
- First (oldest) known version containing the bug
- Last (youngest) version tested still containing the bug.

So my question is: is it possible - does it make sense - or is it already
planned to have these two version informations as separate fields in the bug
table? (didn't find it in the wiki)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: LibreOffice underline problem

[Nino Novak]

Hi Sooraj,

Am 24.10.2014 um 11:01 schrieb sooraj kenoth:

> While using the LibreOffice, I have some problems with the the
> underline. In Malayalam we have a lot of stacked characters. In the
> current way of drawing underline, it strikes the stacked letters. It
> is annoying and it kills the legibility. Please find the screen-shot
> here 
> 
> I have reported the bug here. But they didn't accept. I don't know what to do.
> 

IMHO, here you are right and Joel is wrong: The described behavior is
obviously unwanted and therefore clearly *is* a bug.

Though in this case it might be better characterized as an "enhancement
request" as seemingly nobody did think about a solution until now and
therefore the requirement "make underlining independant from font" has not
been considered yet. (At least this is what I am thinking when looking at
the problem).

So I would change it to "NEW" and "Enhancement Request" and you should try
to "get it fixed". But be patient: probably a completely new underline
functionality must be implemented, which looks like a rather complex task to
me - but I'm not a dev, maybe there exist simpler solutions/workarounds.

my2¢

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice Has Been Reviewed at ListOfFreeware

[Nino Novak]

The search on your website does not work.

Regards,
Nino

Am 16.10.2014 um 07:44 schrieb Ubaid:
> Hello,
> 
> I am Ubaid from www.listoffreeware.com .
> This is a popular tech blog that lists best free software out there.
> 
> I am sending this mail to let you know that we recently reviewed LibreOffice
> on our website here:
> http://listoffreeware.com/best-free-software-convert-powerpoint-pdf/
> 
> Congrats!
> 
> If you want to flaunt this review on your website, feel free to use the
> badge that I have attached with this email, or you can also use the code I
> have added below:
> 
>  href="http://listoffreeware.com/best-free-software-convert-powerpoint-pdf/";
> title="9 Best Free Software To Convert PowerPoint To PDF"> src="_http://listoffreeware.com/wp-content/uploads/Reviewed_At_ListOfFreeware.png
> _"/>
> 
> Feel free to get back to me with any questions.
> 
> Have Fun,
> 
> Ubaid
> Collaboration Manager
> 
> w: http://www.listoffreeware.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] PT > EN translation needed for bug report

[Nino Novak]

I received a translation by PM and added it to the bugs.

Though, the reports don't look very clear to me, therefore the whole action
was of little value I fear. But perhaps now somebody of the QA experts is
able to sort out what the reporters wanted to say.

Nino

Am 10.09.2014 um 18:26 schrieb Nino Novak:
> Could please someone understanding Portuguese have a look at these bugs and
> translate them:
> 
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83681
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83673
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83629
> 
> Thanks,
> Nino
> 
> (proof of concept, QA + l10n lists)
> ___
> 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] PT > EN translation needed for bug report

[Nino Novak]

Could please someone understanding Portuguese have a look at these bugs and
translate them:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83681
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83673
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83629

Thanks,
Nino

(proof of concept, QA + l10n lists)
___
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] request for more boilerplate responses to bug report

[Nino Novak]

Am 10.09.2014 um 02:55 schrieb Terrence Enger:

> I have noticed that Urmas has been abruptly closing bug reports that are
> in languages other than English.

What an arrogant behavior :-(

How about first putting them into NEEDINFO state and asking for translation
here or in the l10n list?

There were several localization bugs written in German I remember - they
were perfectly handled by the NL-Team in their native language without any
need to translate them back and forth. This might be true for other bug
reports too as there are still many people in the world not speaking english.

A NEEDSTRANSLATION keyword could also help if we could somehow report those
bugs to an appropriate list (l10n would be my choice if people there agree
but qa might even be better as most qa-interested NL-folks at least lurk here).

just my2¢

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Second Opinion Needed

[Nino Novak]

Am 22.07.2014 06:19, schrieb Joel Madero:
> 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

Here comes a third opinion ... ;-)

It clearly *is* a bug as it clearly works "against" the user.

If the software is designed to work against the user, then it is not a bug.

But I don't believe, that LibreOffice is designed to work that bad!
Therefore, please reopen the bug. If you like, you may call it an
enhencement request, because this "design bug" has not been thought of until
now. But now it has come up and therefore needs to be acknoledged.

As it clearly is "unwanted behavior", the classification "NOTABUG" is
clearly the wrongest possible decision.

Sorry, my 2 cents.
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220

[Nino Novak]

Hello Christian,

Am 26.06.2014 10:06, schrieb Christian Lohmaier:

> But again @whoeverstartsathread:
> use telling summaries, give a link to click on and a small abstract about
> what is all about (in this case: inserted date-field loses
> locale/langauge-property on document reload). It makes life so much easier
> for others...

ups... you're so right...

I'll do my very best :-)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220

[Nino Novak]

Am 25.06.2014 10:56, schrieb Nino Novak:
> Am 25.06.2014 08:47, schrieb Jay Philips:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I was going through bug 80220 and not able to reproduce it with the
>> instructions provided bug the reporter mentions it effect writing
>> english documents in a german system environment/localization. If
>> someone could look at it, that would be great, as its the only
>> unconfirmed bug left in writer since the 1st of may.
> 
> I'm going to give it a try.

done.

well, in my case it was easy to reproduce, as I'm using the same
localization and the report is rather well done.

However, I cannot estimate the importance/implications as I rather seldom
use writer myself.

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220 (was: Are there any germans in the house)

[Nino Novak]

Am 25.06.2014 08:47, schrieb Jay Philips:
> Hi All,
> 
> I was going through bug 80220 and not able to reproduce it with the
> instructions provided bug the reporter mentions it effect writing
> english documents in a german system environment/localization. If
> someone could look at it, that would be great, as its the only
> unconfirmed bug left in writer since the 1st of may.

I'm going to give it a try.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LIbreOffice 4.2.5 RC2 available

[Nino Novak]

On 21.06.2014 11:56, Jay Philips wrote:

> I assume 4.2 cant become stable until 4.3 becomes fresh. :)

which may be pragmatic but nevertheless sounds strange: it does not make
4.2.x more stable when 4.3.x is released.

If the naming would follow quality criteria, like "at least 95% of the
reported bugs have been fixed" or similar, it would sound more reliable, IMHO.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice Bugzilla (migration) Proposal // Acronym

[Nino Novak]

Am 10.11.2013 07:24, schrieb Tommy:
> On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 07:28:36 +0100, Robinson Tryon
>  wrote:
> 
>> Hiya,
>>
>> As mentioned at the QA Meeting, I've provided a first draft of the
>> proposal to migrate from FDO to our own install of Bugzilla:
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/LibreOffice_Bugzilla_Proposal
>>
>>
>> 
> 
> very and complete overview
> 
> regarding "Abbreviation"
> 
>> We need an abbreviation for the new bug tracker that we can use
>> instead of "FDO".
>> Suggestions:
>> lo ("LO") - e.g. "lo#12345" (The lower-case "L" is ambiguous...)
>> libo
>> bz - e.g. "bz#12345"
>> bgz
> 
> 
> I vote for "libo"
> "lo" makes me think about J.Lo   :-)
> https://twitter.com/JLo

my preference would be "blo" (acronym for bugs.libreoffice.org - if this
is the correct URL for the new tracker)

Regards,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-users] Re: QA Triage Contest

[Nino Novak]

Am 15.07.2013 19:18, schrieb Tom Davies:

> Errr, that graph is rather confusing me.  It's good when it dips lower,
> right?  Although could that be bad in some way?  Does it mean less bugs
> being reported? 

That's correct, so ideally the chart should simultaneously show the # of
bugs reported.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA Triage Contest

[Nino Novak]

Am 11.07.2013 16:36, schrieb Joel Madero:
> Hi All,
> 
> So as you all know the contest is over and it was a great success. Just
> under 25% of the bug count dropped but substantially more bugs were
> triaged as we kept up with the daily demand on top of tackling older bug
> reports.

Joel,

can we see the effect graphically?

Cheers,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] BSA Versions - Update

[Nino Novak]

Am 27.06.2013 21:44, schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:57:44AM -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
>> I have added Bjoern to this as he's the one who might be impacted most
>> because of the Ubuntu issue.
> 
> Can we maybe make the wording more explicit e.g. "reached EOL at TDF"(*)? 

1) I'd even prefer a positive wording ("3.5 Ubuntu" or similar) - if
something short + appropriate can be found.

2) just another thought: does it matter *why* we list the 3.5? Why not
leaving it just "3.5 all versions" like the other 3.x Versions?

@ Robinson (quoting 27.06.2013, 22:04):

> Where do we want these bugs to end up?

another consideration might be:
Do we want offer a platform to a Joe Average bug reporter to report
bugs against these versions? (Why?)

My suggestion from a QA perspective: We should. At least we should try.
If we get overwhelmed with NOTOURBUGs or FIXED in all other versions, we
should reconsider.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Release configuration QA builds for Windows from 4-1 branch

[Nino Novak]

Am 30.05.2013 09:31, schrieb Fridrich Strba:
> ... we set a tinderbox ...

Hi,

where can I find these builds?

Thanks,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Cleaning up QA Nabble and Archive folders from Spam?

[Nino Novak]

Am 13.05.2013 00:03, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:

> That's why we run it on fdo - such that you don't have to worry. ;)

But in this case, IMHO we /have/ to worry a bit as there has been
increasing spam impact in the last week or so.

(For me personnaly it's even a bit more annoying as I'm reading the list
via gmane/nntp where I cannot delete individual spam messages).

So I'd tend to set the qa list to "moderated" as we obviously seem to
have several moderators for the list. Of course, that would cause a
certain delay in case of high frequency postings by (non-subscribed)
devs in a heaty discussion. However, devs could be added to "allowed
senders" list, so this problem could be reduced.

At least, we could give it a try.

My 2 cents

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Wiki pages cruft cleanup

[Nino Novak]

Am 02.04.2013 11:45, schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:

Hi,

I cleaned up:

  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Main_Page
  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development
  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA


a big +1

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap: Test case export?

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

is there an test case export feature from Moztrap?

In what kind of database are the cases stored?

I'm asking because I somehow feel the necessity to organize the cases 
according to my own preferences. Therefore I thought it would be fine to 
export them and experiment locally.


With Moztrap filters it does not seem possible to get fine grained views 
as unfortunately I was not able to tell the filter to use AND as operand 
for the same criterion type (i.e. "tag"). It always seemed to use OR. So 
tags do not provide enough "selection power" for now.


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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap rights

[Nino Novak]

Thank you, Yifan.

and as for your question,

Am 21.03.2013 05:22, schrieb Yifan Jiang:


In addition, take my question as from a curious mind, how come you
need 3 different ids for different roles :) Actually the manager role
will automatically cover all the permissions of Tester and
Creater. Are they for the purpose of testing Moztrap itself?


I always try to work with the lowest possible rights. I've just got used 
to do so since I've started to use linux a while ago.


Kind regards,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Page for BSA process in other languages

[Nino Novak]

Am 21.03.2013 18:59, schrieb Sophie Gautier:


This is a process, not intended for users of the BSA but dedicated to
the NL QA teams and its organization, of course l10n of the page will
follow so moving the page after will be more difficult. So I would like
to follow the QA project rules here.


IMO the Wiki is a bit messy as we did not care too much about content 
organisation in the beginning.


Personally I'd prefer to have a hierarchically organized Page tree like 
there was in the ooowiki, with a clear hierarchy like

QA
QA/Tools
QA/Tools/BSA
...
Though, with the localized subpages feature (QA/xy...), it's a bit 
difficult to organize a content based page hierarchy.


But we should try, at least IMHO.

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap rights

[Nino Novak]

Hi Sophie (or whoever has Admin rights over Moztrap),

long ago I created 3 users to test Moztrap,
nnino
nnino2
nnino3

But none of them seems to have Manager rights.

Could you please re-assign rights to these users and grant them the 
following:


nnino -> Tester
nnino2 -> Creator
nnino3 -> Manager

So I can try to do some constructive pieces of work. I don't know how 
far I will get - but thought I'll give it a try.


Thanks :-)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Manual testing: Litmus or Moztrap?

[Nino Novak]

Hi Sophie,

thanks for the quick answer :-)

further remarks/explanations:

Am 20.03.2013 14:46, schrieb Sophie Gautier:

On 20/03/2013 14:09, Nino Novak wrote:



Q1: Is it correct that Moztrap is ready and should be used for manual
testing? Is Litmus definitively obsolete? (there are several links from
the wiki to Litmus)


Yes, the link to Moztrap on the wiki


(ok, that was my most important question.)



Q2: I did not find a localized UI in Moztrap - is there a possibility to
localize it?


We have a 2700 € budget from TDF for that, but not the Django dev yet,
and I didn't have the time to progress on this, so any help is welcome
:) Currently the handling of localization is not possible for UI and for
the tests themselves is quite a mess if there is several languages
(however we can begin with 2 or 3 languages to be able to improve and
check the process even when the localization with be available).
Moztrap is on my next step after the BSA :)


ok, fine.



Q3: Is it planned to support localized bug tags?


What do you mean by bug tags?


sorry, I meant "test case tags", those little buttons which you can 
press for filtering test cases. ATM, the tags contain only the very 
basic categories (LibO components and p1-p4 test priorities), so they 
don't need localisation. But if we plan to have some more elaborated 
tags, it might be helpful to have them localized.


Even more (*dream*) I'd really love to have a possibility to tag test 
cases with personal tags in order to create test case collections for my 
own specific purposes.




Q4: What is tested automatically - and what needs to be tested manually?
Is there a list of all automatic tests? or at least a rough concept or
somesuch?


The tests should be in git repo, the page on the wiki for Automated
Tests is here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Automated_Tests


As I'm not a developer, I'm not familiar with git. Maybe someone 
knowledgable can extract the "what is tested by this test" info?


Thanks,
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Manual testing: Litmus or Moztrap?

[Nino Novak]

Hi all,

recently we had a short discussion about manual testing in the 
Germanophone list with some questions left.


Q1: Is it correct that Moztrap is ready and should be used for manual 
testing? Is Litmus definitively obsolete? (there are several links from 
the wiki to Litmus)


Q2: I did not find a localized UI in Moztrap - is there a possibility to 
localize it?


Q3: Is it planned to support localized bug tags?

Q4: What is tested automatically - and what needs to be tested manually? 
Is there a list of all automatic tests? or at least a rough concept or 
somesuch?


Thanks
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Feedback from the FR group on the marathon // missing devs' statement

[Nino Novak]

Am 21.12.2012 19:57 schrieb Sophie Gautier:


Just to share it with you, we have had a great participation to the
marathon in the FR community


Nice! Thank you.

What I'm missing a bit is kind of a summary/thankyou/blogpost or 
whatever from the devs ;-)


Has there been a visible increase in the number of bug reports or 
triaged bugs during this week? Could one of the bugzilla experts create 
a nice and encouraging chart from an appropriate query? The stats from 
the QA_Test_Marathon_Stats.ods does not compare this week with a 
"normal" week.


Thanks,
and ... yes, I know it's not polite to ask others to do something but 
I'd really like to see the "difference" of this week graphically.


Nino
unfortunately not being able to participate :-(
___
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] Libre Office 4.*.*

[Nino Novak]

Hallo Martina,

diese QA-Liste ist englischsprachig, trotzdem unten meine Antwort auf 
Deutsch, mit CC an dich, weil ich nicht weiß, ob du sie abonniert hast.


Am 12.12.2012 00:25, schrieb MARTINA LINDENER:

Kann ich diese Version in den mexikanischen PC installieren (hier in
Mexico?) - oder kollidiert der hier ?


zum Testen solltest du auf keinen Fall einen Produktiv-PC nehmen, daher 
würde ich erst mal abwarten, bis es eine stabile Version gibt, meines 
Erachtens frühestens ab der 4.0.5 oder 4.0.6.




Ich brauche täglich 3 Sprachen


dazu können sicher andere mehr sagen, die deutschsprachige Anwenderliste 
us...@de.libreoffice.org wäre meines Erachtens besser geeignet, sofern 
du die Frage auf Deutsch stellst.


Vielleicht stellst du deine Fragen dort nochmal, allerdings solltest du 
besser nur eine Frage per Mail stellen und dazu einen 
ausssagekräftigeren Betreff wählen, dann steigt die Sichtbarkeit deiner 
Anfrage und damit Qualität der Antworten.


Gruß 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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice "Help->Send Feedback" & BSA

[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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] 10,000th Bug Report!

[Nino Novak]

Am 08.10.2012 19:43 schrieb Joel Madero:
> I just randomly did a pull on FDO of all bugs reported under LibO and saw that
> we've hit the 10,000 (exactly) number. 

Sure?

Isn't it just the maximum number of bugs bugzilla lets you export in a normal 
query?

;-)

Nino
AFAIR I counted ~14k Bugs a couple of days ago.
___
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] [proposal] [QA-WE Essen 2012] Bug submission API - How to improve the current system

[Nino Novak]

Hi Florian,

Am 03.10.2012 18:43 schrieb Florian Reisinger:

> During the German QA meeting some ideas developed.

thanks for reporting.

 To cut it short, we came to
> the conclusion, that a Bug Submission API (BS-API) would be very helpful. 

Could you elaborate a little the "why?"?

We have >10 years of OOo/LO without such API, so why do you think it would be
very helpful right now? IOW, which *current* problem is supposed to be solved by
this API?

IIRC, the current bottle neck in QA is triaging and early testing, so don't you
think we should better concentrate forces on triaging+testing and not split 
efforts?

However, I don't want to discourage the initiative. If there is a substantial
drive towards developing the API now, do it. But if it takes ressources from
dev/QA people and distracts them from doing their regular tasks, then please
wait two or three months until unconfirmed bug queue approaches Zero and a
performant early testing workflow has been established ;-)


and /ad rem/ :

(Apart from the skepticism above, I'm very much in favour of making bug
reporting easy, of course.)

I made
> a graphic (http://goo.gl/dHWhu)

(Nice workflow, no objections at first glance.)

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Statement draft (was: minutes of the LibreOffice QA call 2012-09-26 1300UTC)

[Nino Novak]

Am 27.09.2012 00:13 schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:

>  - better mission statement for QA: proposals? -> postponed

Though postponed, I drafted a first proposal on [1].

Feel free to change it according to your *own* ideas, intentions & goals, as
it's up to every single QA activist to bring in his/her special attitude and
motivation. In the end, the sum will make the difference :-)

Nino

[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Talk: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] Triage Project Update

[Nino Novak]

Am 04.09.2012 23:05 schrieb Joel Madero:
> I agree that FDO has some benefits but the limitation is really that each user
> is needed to query every time,  the possibility of overlap is great, and no 
> one
> is really responsible for an individual bug until the query is made and 
> someone
> takes the time to look into it. I'm not sure if others would agree but it 
> seems
> like having a "group" of 50 or so and being able to just do those at your
> convenience makes people more likely to help and feel like their is an end in
> sight for "their portion". This is vs. just seeing a never ending list from 
> FDO
> or even having to "teach" new users (or even not new users) exactly what to
> search for every time with FDO.

As for me (a rather unexperienced QA Newbie), I've chosen a somewhat  different
approach: I've first created two custom searches,

1) all recent bugs (reported within the last two days) for curiosity (just to
see what people report recently)

2) all UNCONFIRMED bugs from the last 14 days

>From query 2 I picked a couple of bugs every couple of days to
reproduce/confirm/assign/close/whatever seemed appropriate.

That's just to show a slightly different approach, which is rather simple and
can be handled perfectly within bugzilla itself without any external tool.

Ok, the only problem was, that when a person starts reproducing a bug, it can
happen, that another triager just starts with the very same bug at the same
time. So some kind of lock signal was the only missing thing to prevent
duplication of work. However, this situation did not happen a single time during
my self-chosen "BugReviewWeek" ;-)

Another advantage: By the above process nobody (virtually) "blocks" 50 bugs for
a longer time period. Bugzilla queries are very adequate at every time, as all
works with live data.


> Similar to how developers assign themselves bugs and then can just go look at
> their own bugs ("My Bugs") it would be nice to have this ability for QA 
> triagers
> but have it somewhat automated since it's just triaging, not programming. In 
> the
> long run (once we're through the back log of 650+ that are really old), it 
> would
> be amazing if we had a team of QA staff that signed up to have bugs "auto
> assigned" to them for triaging.

We have the libreoffice-bugs@fdo mailing list, which contains (nearly?) every
new bug. Could we use it somehow for this purpose? E.g. by replying to a bug or
forwarding it to the qa list or some such? (Just thoughts, nothing concrete)



 What I imagine:
> 
> QA triagers "sign up" for components they are willing to triage and their 
> "max"
> load
> New bug is reported, if the bug has a component listed the bug gets "auto
> assigned" for triaging purposes according to some rule(s)

Personally, I prefer not to sign up for a special component but to pick a recent
bug which kind of "attracts" me spontanously. But there might be other
opinions/preferences/arguments/approaches.


> For now the google docs works, FDO does not as it is now but I'll discuss this
> further with Bjoern, Petr & Rainer to see if we can come up with something 
> more
> functional than the chaos that is FDO :) Or maybe I'm just not familiar enough
> with FDO to really feel comfortable myself with it, this is more likely than 
> not
> true :)

:-)

I like your initiative. Please don't feel discouraged by my comments, I just
wanted to add a slightly different view. If people like your approach, that's
great! It does not contradict to mine (IMHO), as it's rather obvious if a bug
has been triaged or not. So we can all work together towards our common goal.

Regards,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Triage Project Update

[Nino Novak]

Am 04.09.2012 21:52 schrieb Joel Madero:
> Basically it would be really nice to be able to group and assign bugs the
> way that the document does. I think bugs are much more manageable this way
> and we've seen a relative spike in QA triaging activity since starting the
> process this way.

Ok, I see: it makes the process a bit more transparent/obvious. And thus is more
pleasant and possibly "invites" more contributors.


 Not sure if you looked at the document but it's basically
> manual everything,

I looked at it but could not see what is so special with it...

I'll try to compare (please comment if you find this inadequate):


 I download FDO bugs to Calc, group them based on
> Component,

can be done by a bugzilla query

 then manually copy and paste into groupings of no more than 50.

(is this really that important? for crowdsourcing, it might suffice to do
coordination by e-mail)

> It would be incredibly nice to have the list updated automatically based on
> FDO, group the bugs based on component and then group each of those to a
> max of 50 bugs per group.

if it's a live query, it's current every time you run it

 If each group of 50 could then be assigned to a
> user it would be easy for members of QA to get involved with this project
> and get this back log taken care of.

Ok, I don't know how to build such chunks of 50 bugs using a query - but - is it
so important? Couldn't we use e.g. time periods (weeks or months) to group the
bugs? Then the number would not be constant but who cares?


 I'm not sure if this is possible or
> incredibly time consuming (if it is, probably not worth it).

I don't know either but wanted to understand what exactly is needed and if it's
possible to find (slightly) different solutions which can be implemented more
quickly (or are already existing but not thought of)


 It would be
> even better if we, as the QA team could do a custom "group" and then it
> could assign us bugs based on that. For instance, I'm a QA member and I
> want to do 20 bugs that are either Writer, Calc or Presentation, and I want
> the oldest bugs (in terms of those that have been left UNCONFIRMED for the
> longest period of time). It could then give me the list and allow me to
> assign myself to the group, and thus prevent other QA members from getting
> those bugs in their list when they do a custom search.

There is a QA Contact field which has not been used extensively (at least
according to my recent search). Could it be used for this purpose? (Rainer? 
Björn?)


> Sorry I felt like that was a bit of rambling, let me know if you need it
> clarified, I can hardly understand it myself ;)

So let me be a bit of a devil's advocate, aka clarification helper :-)

(I've been working in a project as QA helper years ago for several months, they
used excel sheets, so I think I understand the need to master the bugs, and to
make the processes transparent and obvious. And thus lower the entry barrier for
noobs, too btw.)

So my present guess would be:
- asking for a web tool is ok but - if there's no better tools ATM, let's stay
with google docs for the time coming
- but let's also try to use bugzilla itself as much as possible
- we have also the wiki, but I do not see much advantage of using it compared to
a google spreadsheet as it does not support storing/handling structured data.
But it's a web, so we can document all processes nicely and link the documents
in the wiki.

Regards,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Triage Project Update

[Nino Novak]

Hi Joel,

Am 04.09.2012 19:18 schrieb Joel Madero:

> I have done a complete update of the google document, this being said, if
> you named a sheet to your name, it's gone. Noel pointed out that a lot of
> the bugs on the sheet were already triaged so I just started from scratch.
> I'm still hoping the web team can help us move this away from google docs
> and get it automated a bit but for now, it is what it is.

I'm not sure to understand what you want to have automated, could you elaborate
just a little bit (or - if you have done so already - point me to the archived
mail)?

Thanks,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA Call 2012-08-24

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

on 26.08.2012 22:44, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

>- send list of active wranglers (Rainer) (again?)

Where is this list? Is it a bugzilla query? Is it possible to create a
(monthly?) report/bar graph on "who reviewed how many bugs"?

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Disquieting Writer bug report -- has anybody ever faced such problems?

[Nino Novak]

Hi Roman,

Am 23.08.2012 13:13 schrieb Roman Eisele:

>   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53898

> Even if we ignore all of the reporter's (IMHO completely understandable) 
> anger,
> this bug report is disquieting.

At least it could deserve some "sorting out" what could be caused by bugs
(real/UX) and what are mere features ,-)

> My question to all: has anybody ever seen such things in Writer?

A little bit, yes. Especially when I'm tired and start to do something I never
did before. Some automatisms drove me crazy. But fortunately I've learned pretty
well to google for switching them off :-)


 Have you got an
> idea how to fix the reporter's problems? IMHO he deserves a good and very 
> polite
> answer, but the most important thing is probably the question how to help him.

It's in the first place a bug tracker, so helping him would be my second
thought. My first thought would be to get him to give us more information.

Therefore, my suggested answer is about:

"It would be extremely informative and valueable to have you here and look at
what you are exactly doing.

Software sometimes "thinks" too much and default behavior can be
counter-intuitive and irritating.

On the other hand, there is rather active development at present and thus bugs
and regressions could have been introduced.

Therefore it would be very nice if you could give a step by step explanation
what you exactly intended to do, what you did, and what the
(intended/unintended) outcome was of every step. So we can address them one by
one. Thank you."

Regards,
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] QA Mission Statement (was: Re: Fwd: Re: Closing NEEDINFO bugs)

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

On 20. Aug 2012 00:56, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> [...]
> The first goal of the QA team is [...]

nice statement :-)

I had the impulse to put it in a prominent place on the QA Homepage[1]. Feel
free to complete it or improve wording.

Nino
[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/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] A little confused re: QA and help from users

[Nino Novak]

Not really an answer but rather some related questions/thoughts:

Am 19.06.2012 09:47, schrieb Marc Paré:

Like the title says, I am a little confused over QA and help from users.
Do people who are on this list participate in any QA?


Don't know if I understand your question - I'd assume that people 
subscribed to this (libo-qa) list are particularly interested in doing 
QA work plus organizing it.




For example, I usually download any LO Beta series on up. Is there
anything that I could do to help with QA? Testing? I cannot do very long
QA tests but even short tests? No sense in downloading the pre-releases
and not helping out when I can.


I'd assume that this is exactly what many people do: downloading a 
"young" version from time to time (or even regularly) and trying to 
perform some of their usual daily work with it. This might be called 
some kind of "silent QA", because nobody ever learns about the results 
of these attempts. However - hopefully - they'll report back to a list 
or to bugzilla if they encounter any blockers or strange behavior (at 
least I do).


My personal thought is that we should try to better coordinate such 
"silent testing" as it might be the case that some functions get tested 
thousandfold and others not at all. My hope is that with Litmus/Moztrap 
a more/better coordintated/systematic testing can be achieved. But I 
don't know what the progress is as I've not been following the list for 
quite a while now.




Do we need more help from users specifically for QA on this list? It
looks like the process is pretty much automated or am I wrong?


This question shows that the available info about this part of the QA is 
still incomplete (or not visible enough): What exactly is tested 
autmatically - and what needs (additional) manual testing?


However - personally I'd say that QA needs as many qualified people as 
possible, but that's not enough: the QA work needs better 
coordination/synchronization, too.


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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Bug Lifecycle diagram (was: Re: minutes of the LibreOffice QA call 2012-05-04 14:00 UTC)

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

On 07.05.2012 20:47, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

Hi all,

here are the minutes of the QA call on 2012-05-04 1400UTC.


Thanks.


bug wrangling (Rainer):
- handling needinfo bugs
Question: Do we have a bug lifecylce illustration? For not-so-trained 
people this can be of real help in understanding QA.
I found a generic one at  [1], but our friends at AOO do also have a 
nice one[2] on their QA web[3] which might be worth having a look at ;-)



[1] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.2/en/html/lifecycle.html
[2] see PDF on 
http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/ooQA-IssueRules.html

[3] http://www.openoffice.org/qa/


Regards, Nino


  - conclusion: more liberal use of assigned should be ok if in status 
"NEEDINFO" (only)
AA   - send a proposal for liberal assigned use in NEEDINFO to Rainer for 
review (Bjoern)
- change version "master" to release branch on branch off?
  see: 
http://rrbd.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/how-can-we-allow-more-purposeful-queries-for-version-master/
AA - create a QA EasyHack "Gather own bugzilla requirements" (Bjoern)
  - create a wikipage with what we have so far and link to it (Rainer)

community building/communication (Cor?)
- the QA dashboard needs some love
- we should identify top-priority action items after each call, those should
  be done ASAP/to the next call. The are marked AA+ in the minutes (Cor)
AA+- blog about QA EasyHacks (Cor/Bjoern)
AA+- blog about daily build changes/bugs/features from git log (Cor)
  - this should happen best once every 1-2 weeks
  - Rainer looking into this too
  - if git log messages are unparseable to mere mortals, dont hestitate to
email the author about this, this should also encourage good commit
messages (Bjoern)
  - this should also go out to the QA-List and social media
- To grow the QA community and get more people to run and test master we
  should ask people to verify issues once they are marked fixed by dev
AA   - blog about bug verification (Bjoern)
  - the goal is not so much to supervise developer fixes, but the side
effects like:
- more people running master
- more people getting involved/started with an easy task on QA
- verification is positive/uplifting, while confirming bugs might be
  more demotivating

bibisect for 3.5 release branch and 3.6 master (Bjoern):
- no bibisect for 3.5 still (no urgent calls that it is needed yet)
- there is a up-to-date 3.6 bibisect up until 2012-04-28 with more than 60
  full libreoffice installs based on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS
AA - also rebuild the old ~50 3.5 bibisect installs for the next update (Bjoern)
- we should grow bibisect knowledge wide and far to get a stable pool of
  people who can mentor it

Next call will be on 2012-05-18 1400UTC.

Top priority action item as hinted to me by Cor.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] voortgang issue 46250 Libre office 3.5.3

[Nino Novak]

On Friday 04 May 2012, 15:42:00 Frank van Lier wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> I want too check the issue 46250 if it is by everybody, so it can help
> to solve the issue in 3.5.4???
> 
> Do you help me here to solve the issue by confirm the issue.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Frank van Lier

Frank, there's no point in confirming a confirmed issue. 

What's necessary in my eyes is giving evidence, i.e. describing Real Life 
situations, where it's nearly impossible to work around the bug, then pushing 
it to "most annoying (37361)" and hoping a dev can fix it and backport the fix 
to 3.5. 

My personal opinion: it IS annoying (but I don't need the function often, so 
I'm not the right person to engage with the bug).

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Glitch in fdo Bugzilla? (attachmend assigned to wrong account)

[Nino Novak]

On Wednesday 25 April 2012, 15:37:43 dE . wrote:

> File a bug, but probably this's a upstream problem.

done: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49139

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug Triage best practice: Change or not change assignee?

[Nino Novak]

Hi Guys,

can we have a decision in this matter? 

Do we/you need more information/ more time - or is it just different heart 
feelings? 

Shall we make an operational tradeoff by defining a test period of, say, one 
year? 

For me, the matter itself is not that important, I can arrange with both 
procedures, but I'd really like to test Bjoerns hypothesis of community 
empowerment ;-)

So, please, for meritocratic reasons, Bjoern and Rainer, I believe it's up to 
you to decide. (Or is ESC or whatever tdf Board the right gremium? I don't 
know)

Thanks,
Nino
PS - just one thing:

> (*) You should never think of QA as "I", even if it sometimes feels that
> way: It will be a selffulfilling prophecy and hamper community growth.

or - to say it positive: Think of QA as 
* qualified constructive feedback for the devs and
* important contribution to enhance and sustain quality and thus acceptance of 
the software
___
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] [ANN] LibreOffice 3.5.3 RC1 test builds available

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

On Tuesday 24 April 2012, 10:46:16 Petr Mladek wrote:
> klaus-jürgen weghorn ol píše v So 21. 04. 2012 v 10:49 +0200:
> > Am 20.04.2012 12:44, schrieb Fridrich Strba:
> > 
> > > 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:
> The above paragraph explains why we do not spread the information too
> much.

BTW - do you have actual numbers? How many downloads do we actually have and 
how many does the server allow maximally? And about how many bugs have been 
reported in the 24-h-period in the past?

Thanks, 
Nino
(just curious)
___
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] Glitch in fdo Bugzilla? (attachmend assigned to wrong account)

[Nino Novak]

On Monday 23 April 2012, 12:38:40 Nino Novak wrote:


> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48329

another similar looking phenomenon:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48509
here, 2 times the same attachment upload in comments.

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Glitch in fdo Bugzilla? (attachmend assigned to wrong account)

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48329 the second attachment 
(help_poster.doc) has been uploaded by user mikebgx, as shown correctly in the 
entry in the "Attachments section" on top. 

However comment #3 pretends I myself had uploaded the document. 

???

In this case, it's not a problem, but what if the document contained some 
malware...

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LibreOffice 3.5.3 RC1 test builds available

[Nino Novak]

On Friday 20 April 2012, 16:42:19 MiguelAngel wrote:

> Seems the file:
> http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/win/x86/LibO_3.5.3rc1_Win_x86
> _helppack_en-US.msi doesn't download, also en-GB and other, they open as
> text file,

For me, it works well (Linux, FF 11). 

But the server returns 'Content-Type: text/plain', so this might be a problem.  

Regards, 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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] pls a look at issues 48333 and 48869

[Nino Novak]

On Thursday 19 April 2012, 22:25:05 Cor Nouws wrote:

>   Bug 48869 - Crash when dragging selected column to the left (edit)

Can't ALT+drag a column under KDE as this combo moves the whole window by 
default. 

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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Bug Triage best practice: Change or not change assignee?

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

the question emerged, if reassigning a NEEDINFO-bug to the presumed info 
provider[1] is Good or Bad. Please advise.

Nino
[1]
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=BugTriage&diff=prev&oldid=42240
___
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] [TESTED] Re: 3.5.1 Online Update testing

[Nino Novak]

Hi Christian,

On Friday 09 March 2012, 15:17:26 Christian Lohmaier wrote:

> it is the server that
> makes the decision whether there is an update, not LibreOffice.
> LibreOffice just displays the server's response.

ah, ok, I see!

thanks for clarification ;-)

Bye,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [TESTED] Re: 3.5.1 Online Update testing

[Nino Novak]

On Friday 09 March 2012, 03:57:48 Pedro wrote:

> ol klaus-jürgen weghorn wrote
> 
> > Works now officially with RC2.
> 
> It does indeed. But the Update message is still confusing...
> 
> "LibreOffice 3.5.1 RC2 is available.
> 
> The installed version is LibreOffice 3.5.1."
> 
> Why would someone who already has version 3.5.1 would want to update to an
> RC release? :)
> 
> It should report "3.5.1.2 is available". 

No, it should do nothing - from the end user point of view. 

For a 3.5.1 instal it should only report when a 3.5.2 (final!) update is 
available.

(So the test is "not passed" in my eyes)

Or does the notifyer behave different in RCs? (If so, it's not an RC!)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

[Nino Novak]

Hi Bjoern, all,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 12:48:25 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote:

> > [test case tagging]
>
> Noted.

Thanks :-)

> We will discuss that on the call.

If time allows, fine. 

But on the call you should (IMHO) focus on strategic questions as identifying 
the actual QA bottlenecks  :-)

And of course, bringing all those thoughts from you, Cor and Yifan into an 
adequate coherence :-)

> > [Bug Review Weeks]
> 
> Go ahead and organize! Dont ask for permission to get started, just do and
> see what works. 

Wasn't meant as question just as idea sharing :-)


> > [community test case gathering]
> 
>...  Are you interested in contributing to this?

(I am a bit hesitant - as my skills are not very prominent in this area. 
But my personal preference ATM is the Review Week. )


> Such things should never be one-way, but an exchange: You write one test you
> care about and let others test it for you, in exchange for you testing the
> stuff that _others_ care about.

If we could manage to put together a system that supports such mutual hand 
washing, it would be fine. But without, I'm a bit lost, how to organize this. 
OTOH, pure Test Case gathering could simply be started in the wiki. So I'd 
tend to start with gathering first and add mutuality later?

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

[Nino Novak]

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 08:42:10 Nino Novak wrote:

> Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

just an additional thought: 
is there a possibility to define certain "test paths"? Mean, some kind of 
"sophisticated" test case which - if passed - "contains" a couple of "simple" 
test cases? Thus, result entry could be simplified a lot.
E.g. if there is a testcase, "print monthly expenses report from CSV data 
using data pilot", it would encompass opening a file, CSV import, data pilot 
function, data grouping, table printing.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 02:45:13 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
> propose to make our first call on:

Great!

Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

> structured manual testing:
>  - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
> - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)

I'd like to add a typical requirement/wish from an occasional tester:
- to have an easy way to set up an individual collection of test cases which 
can be reused (first idea: e.g. by tagging them), so that everybody sees, who 
is "subscribed" to a test case (and also on which platform). Thereby, manual 
release testing can be kind of self-coordinated without big effort. 

> upstream bugwrangling:
>  - >1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor
> Nouws) - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)

idea/proposal from the German discuss list: to organize "Bug Review Weeks" (in 
contrast/addition to "Bug Hunting Sessions") as community events, preferably 
in native languages and only later on international level, so the learning 
curve / barrier can be kept smooth. 

An additional (possibly somewhat crazy) idea: To gather test cases from the 
community by asking "What functionality do *you* want to be tested? Provide a 
well-thought-out testcase for your personal most needed function (or most 
annoying regression ;-) ".

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] test cases quality; was: Ubuntu/Canonical doing more manual testing for LibreOffice?

[Nino Novak]

On Monday 05 March 2012, 10:41:06 Petr Mladek wrote:

> No, we already have a support for translating the test cases. I am sure
> that we will be able to do it even more cleanly in the future.

Is it correct that the Litmus UI is not localized yet? (Is it localizable at 
all?)

Is there (or will there be) a possibility to "tag" a test case by a tester? So 
that tests can be grouped deliberately? (I'm dreaming about an individual set 
of test cases which I'm sort of "subscribed to": thus a great coverage could 
be achieved, if there are a few people and everybody subscribes to a different 
- individual - set).

Thanks,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Thread on QA done by l10n teams

[Nino Novak]

On Friday 02 March 2012, 18:26:32 Sophie Gautier wrote in libo-l10n:

> http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/msg04226.html

Hi Sophie, all, 

I'm not subscribed to the l10n list, so I'm trying to answer here. Also, I 
don't know about others, I just can tell what I'm doing myself:

> - Are you doing manual tests on the builds?

yes, if time allows on most of Beta and RC builds

> . using Litmus?

No, just for lack of time.

> - Are you running other types of tests

yes

> .which one?

"en passant silent testing" :-)

Means: I just install the release in parallel and try to use it as much as 
possible for my daily tasks. With critical documents, I work on a sandbox copy 
and replace the original later (only if all went smooth)

That way, testing does not take much time (just installing the version and 
creating a testing copy each time I want to work on a critical document) but 
is very effective as I perform "real tasks" (and not artificial test cases) 
with real data (i.e. sometimes large old documents).  

BTW, nobody will notice this kind of testing (of course unless a problem or 
bug comes up). That's why I've suggested to implement some kind of simple 
logging ability into test builds but unfortunately, this seems to be too 
complicated for the devs. 

BTW, I'm doing "functional testing" only but as I use the localized (German) 
Version, I hope I will notice l10n problems, too (and have so in past).

(I believe, that many many people do such "personal silent testing" without 
anybody knowing how many tests were performed on what platform and with which 
kind of documents)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Relase_Criteria wiki page change request

[Nino Novak]

On Thursday 16 February 2012, Petr Mladek wrote:

> Nino Novak píše v Čt 16. 02. 2012 v 02:01 +0100:

> > [Transclusion] 
>
> Sounds wonderful! I was not aware of such feature.

oh, there are still many "unused wiki features" left ;-)
 

> > For conveniance, I've attached a patch, hopefully it works ;-)
> 
> I have done the changes. I hope that correctly ;-)

Yepp, thanks, works fine :-)


> Anyway, feel free to do such changes yourself. If it works as you say,
> it is just a great improvement.

There must have been a (cache?) problem with exactly this page as I was not 
allowed to edit it (always getting the "browse source" response only, telling 
me that my email has not been verified yet).

Now I tried again and it finally worked  :-)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bibisecting HowTo published on the wiki

[Nino Novak]

Hi Bjoern,

could you provide a md5sum of the tar package? 

I'm on slow internet and after downloading more than 7 hours I get 

nino@chef:~/liboqa/Material/bibisect> tar --lzma -xf bibisect-3.5.tar.lzma
lzma: (stdin): File format not recognized
tar: Child returned status 1
tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now

Is the size correct?
nino@chef:~/liboqa/Material/bibisect> l b*
-rw--- 1 nino users 785268428 16. Feb 13:08 bibisect-3.5.tar.lzma

Thanks,
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Relase_Criteria wiki page change request

[Nino Novak]

Hi Petr,

could you please update the ReleasePlan wiki page[1] and add  
tags around the table under Blocker Bug Nomination?

I'd like to transclude the table into the German translated page so that it 
gets updated automatically there. 
(I've just tried it with a test page so it has been proved to work)

For conveniance, I've attached a patch, hopefully it works ;-)

Thanks,
Nino

[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria--- Release_Criteria.txt	2012-02-16 01:35:03.256719428 +0100
+++ Release_Criteria-modified.txt	2012-02-16 01:45:51.616725867 +0100
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@

 == Blocker Bug Nomination  ==

-Set '''severity''': ''blocker'', add comment and dependency to the '''meta bug''':
+Set '''severity''': ''blocker'', add comment and dependency to the '''meta bug''':
 {| width="100%" class="wikitable" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2"
 |-
 ! Release Version  !!Task Meta Bug !! Blocker bugs !! Most annoying bugs !! Remarks
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
 |[https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&field0-0-0=blocked&product=LibreOffice&query_format=advanced&type0-0-0=anywordssubstr&value0-0-0=6&order=bug_severity%2Cpriority%2Cbug_id&query_based_on=  annoying bugs] (**)
 |
 |}
-
+
 (*) Check also [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=blocker&query_format=advanced&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&product=LibreOffice all blocker bugs].
 :
 (**) Check also [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?negate0=1&keywords=regression%2C%20&query_format=advanced&keywords_type=allwords&list_id=36720&field0-0-0=blocked&type0-0-0=anywordssubstr&value0-0-0=6%2037361%2035673&resolution=---&product=LibreOffice regressions not handled in most annoying bugs] and [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?keywords=regression%2C%20&keywords_type=allwords&list_id=36698&resolution=---&query_format=advanced&product=LibreOffice all regressions].
___
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] RC3 released as Final version???

[Nino Novak]

On Wednesday 15 February 2012, Petr Mladek wrote:

> What about having the following for the beta builds:
> 
>   LibreOffice 3.5.0beta1
>   BuildID: iwohm-noinaog-nzorioinoih-mfowiom
> 
> and the following for rc builds:
> 
>   LibreOffice 3.5.0.x
> BuildID: iwohm-noinaog-nzorioinoih-mfowiom

However you decide - any chance to have the same strings returned also when 
invoking "libreoffice --version" cli command?  (consistency ...)

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/

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

[Nino Novak]

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
> > them. I do no know any way to get numbers of Comments from current
> > Bugzilla version, and not every edit is a good edit.
> 
> You have the same problem with the wiki credits. Even the spammers get
> one or two credit points and come on the credit list.

Having "false-positives" ist bad, of course. 

But IMO false-negatives are worse :-/

So I'd still vote for some type of 'credit points' like Yifan brought in. 

In my eyes, it's enough summing them up alltogether, but we also could 
consider to differentiate. But this would end up in something like

  PersonX(12/3/23/8) 

which I'd consider rather ugly.

my 2 ¢

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/

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

[Nino Novak]

Hi Cor,

Am Samstag, 4. Februar 2012, 23:39:02 schrieb Cor Nouws:

> Today with my little QA presentation at FOSDEM, one person asked about
> how we give credits to people doing this work.
> Well, not structural/in a visible place, as far as I know.
> 
> What about adding something here:
>http://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/credits/  ?
> 
> We need to have some rule of course, based on which people get mentioned.
> Suggestions remarks?

Good question! (It's IMHO the question, how we measure meritocracy.)

We have the commit count for devs, the edit count for wiki contributions, so 
what if we start with the number of reported bugs in a first approximation? 

(In my eyes, not only the count but also the "value" of a contribution should  
count, but how to define the value? So, the count should be a good start)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] preparing QA talk for FOSDEM

[Nino Novak]

Am Freitag, 27. Januar 2012, 16:17:25 schrieb Cor Nouws:
> Hi Nino,
> 
> Nino Novak wrote (27-01-12 15:09)
> 
> > Personally I have the impression / concern that Quality is getting one
> > of the main challenges of LibreOffice as it seems to decrease more and
> > more
> I disagree with you.

No problem for me - as long as you continue your QA improving efforts ;-)


> And it's not an answer to my serious question. Sorry about that.

I'm just a simple user, so maybe my view is a bit naive. But my general 
concern/intention is to help improving LibO quality.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] preparing QA talk for FOSDEM

[Nino Novak]

Am Samstag, 28. Januar 2012, 14:14:15 schrieb Luc Castermans:
> Op 27-01-12 16:17, Cor Nouws schreef:
> > Hi Nino,
> > 
> > Nino Novak wrote (27-01-12 15:09)
> > 
> >> Personally I have the impression / concern that Quality is getting one
> >> of the main challenges of LibreOffice as it seems to decrease more
> >> and more> 
> > I disagree with you.
> > And it's not an answer to my serious question. Sorry about that.
> 
> Seems you guys talk opinion wise.   Could we have some facts ?

No hard facts from my side, only feelings, impressions, concerns. I'm using 
LibO myself and watching mailing lists, so my feelings are simply based on 
what I experience and what I read in the lists.

However, my wish to monitor "bug-free usage" comes exactly out of the desire 
to collect some (hard) facts. 

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] preparing QA talk for FOSDEM

[Nino Novak]

Am Freitag, 27. Januar 2012, 00:05:48 schrieb Cor Nouws:

> Ideas, things to add?

Personally I have the impression / concern that Quality is getting one of the 
main challenges of LibreOffice as it seems to decrease more and more - and 
software acceptance to a good deal depends on quality (especially in corporate 
environments).

So anything that /really/ raises quality is good ;-)

My own ideas go into the direction of "monitoring bug-free usage", e.g. by 
logging main user actions (module used, opening/closing files, menu path, 
toolbar icon klicks and so on) into a simple text file. But I really don't 
know if this is a good subject to talk about at FOSDEM.

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Problem with Bug Submission Assistant

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

I'm answering to the list as I did not experience the described problem and 
thus probably cannot add much valuable info to the bug. 

On Thursday 19 January 2012, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:
 
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42121 
> BUGZILLAASSISTANT: Submission process does not start, remains before Step 1
>
> ...
>
> My questions:
>   have you also ever been affected by that problem?

No (at least not consciously). In my internet experience, non-reproducible 
loading problems have always been occuring from time to time, so if the page 
won't load, I'd probably simply hit ENTER once again or F5 to reload and not 
paid much attention to it. 

> do you have any idea or research results what the reason for the
> problem might be?

The Assistant depends on several components (javascript in the browser, 
bugzilla availability, https connections...). It only works if all components 
collaborate smoothly, so in my eyes, there are several places where problems 
or timeouts could occur. 

Maybe looking into the server logs might give more information? Maybe the 
occurence frequency could also be found out from the logs? 

Regards,
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] 3.5.0 QA ... from BHS 1 to BHS 2

[Nino Novak]

Hi,

please keep in mind that I'm by no means a QA expert, but sometimes I'm good 
in expressing thoughts and fears of ordinary people ;-)

On Tuesday, January 10, 2012 09:58:48 AM Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 16:20 +0100, Nino Novak wrote:
>
> ...
>
>   So - I'd love to understand this desire for less frequent releases
> better :-) After all, we have tinderboxes churning out at least daily
> releases (in theory), perhaps several a day if we are lucky.

I think, people simply need enough time as daily spare time window might be 
small: imagine about 2-3x weekly 1-2 hours, but often there's much less. So in 
good times they can install one release per week and test it for one or two 
1-2 hours periods in the same week. That's it. 

As for the frequency: I for my part prefer to have a most-recent build for 
testing, so no - the release frequency should IMHO *not* decrease. But somehow 
I'd also like to have the feeling of "having enough time to test in depth". 
Here a clearer prioriritization might be helpful.

I don't know if it's important, but I just wanted to mention that I very 
rarely take the time to test a release according to a fixed testing plan 
(Litmus etc) but most often just try to do my usual office work on copies of 
my original documents in a sandbox (and if nothing suspicious happens, after 
3-4 weeks those sandbox document copies become masters again and replace the 
original documents). And my impression is, that many people do this "en 
passant testing" and thereby discover problems or bugs. 

 
>   What is the concern about having new RC's ? is it that you think
> developers will not care about and/or test any bugs that appear in
> something one release-candidate old ? [ that seems unlikely if it is a
> serious bug ], or ? ...

For /serious/ bugs, well, ok, but what if they are not-so-serious? Where's the 
threshold? 

And, to raise a different issue: People might well feel overwhelmed by the 
release frequency. Lost in release fusillades, so to speak. I personally have 
decided to concentrate on testing the most recent code line whenever possible. 
But many people still do not understand the release plan, and in addition do 
not know, how they can be (or make) sure that their test install will not 
interfere with their productive version. The QA-FAQ does not address this 
issue, you have to search for infos in the wiki...

So in summary, it may be a little bit the Mohammed - mountain problem. Cor's 
activities are a good starting point and most appreciated :-)

In the end, we have the common goal to make the software working as smoothly 
as possible. 

 
> > Fourth, which is more an open question, how the success of Release QA
> > could be monitored intelligently. My (naive) wish would be to have
> > usage numbers, let's say
> > - how often a Release has been launched on which OS platform without
> > failure
>   We have some download statistics of those that can be extracted (I
> suspect), and we have the on-line update statistics too which may give
> some yard-stick for successful launch ;-) usually the app has to stay
> alive for a little while to do that request.

(I'd appreciate if something like that could be implemented, but the effort 
should be kept low)

 
> > - how often which module has been started
> > - how many documents have been created/edited/viewed successfully
> > - which particular functions have been called how often successfully
> 
>   These other phone-home things are more tricky, needing coding support,
> but it's of course a good idea to ensure good code coverage. Ideally -
> I'd like to reduce the burden on human QA though, so we're investing and
> encouraging (where we can) fast automated test that run during the
> compile: so you should never get a build that has pathaological failures
> [ assuming our test are complete enough ;-]. Hopefully that makes the
> process of QA more difficult & rewarding ;-) but of course there is
> always room for lots of improvement, and some things are hard to test.

All the above written does not relate to machine tests, only to manual tests. 
We should keep these two different approches well separated in discussion as 
they have different needs each one. For automated tests, you need skilled 
people. Manual testing can be done by Joe Average, at least in theory.

 
>   One thing that is really nasty to test is the new
> header/footer/page-break stuff. I get intermittent leakage of
> page-breaks in documents (with several rendered on the screen); -but-
> while (after editing a document) I can reproduce them nicely, if I save
> & re-load in another instance - I cannot ;-) so - there is a real need
> for some "from a clean document" r

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] 3.5.0 QA ... from BHS 1 to BHS 2

[Nino Novak]

Hi Cor,

Am Sonntag, 8. Januar 2012, 22:52:22 schrieb Cor Nouws:

> Other hits/remarks of course appreciated as well :-)

Just some gut feelings from an occasional tester.

First, somehow I'd personally like to have a longer period for Release related 
QA activities/events, at least a one-week period after each beta or RC 
release. (Even better 2-weeks, though this might rise distraction.)

Second, for me it seems rather important to (better? strongly?) communicate 
the QA efforts as a genuine community task. 

Third, I'd like to have those so called Mentors prominently around, so that 
people can address them any time, not only during particular QA 
events/periods.  

Fourth, which is more an open question, how the success of Release QA could be 
monitored intelligently. My (naive) wish would be to have usage numbers, let's 
say
- how often a Release has been launched on which OS platform without failure
- how often which module has been started
- how many documents have been created/edited/viewed successfully
- which particular functions have been called how often successfully

I know, this might be a bit difficult to implement, but however - that's what 
came to my mind :-)

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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA-Team Web page

[Nino Novak]

Hi Rainer,

Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012, 15:22:41 schrieb Rainer Bielefeld:

> I started a new QA-Team Page [2]

why didn't you just update the existing page? (just wondering - so we now have 
two pages, and nobody will know which is the actual one?)

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/