Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Hi, I am currently cleaning up my mailbox and found this mail that is close to a year old. 2012/7/17 Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com Nice, the updates make it quite a bit more functional. I noticed that most of the really useful functions are already well on their way to being implemented. Those cube functions...I've never even heard of. Otherwise, I think the users list was not very accurate, I think he had 25+ functions, I found a total of 14. Thanks again, Joel On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Eike Rathke er...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Joel, On Tuesday, 2012-07-17 08:36:22 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I've started the page. You can find information on the Calc development page (bottom). Thanks for the guidance, hopefully I (and maybe others) can complete the list soon and then decide if/when/how to start getting the most important functions implemented. Thanks for getting this started, I took the freedom and fiddled with it ;-) Eike It refers to https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc/Spreadsheet_Functions, where there is a list MS Office function currently missing in LO Calc. The last update of the page was 2012-07-21. The page states that 6 of the 14 functions are implemented in OOo CWS pending integration. As far as I know, this integration is done, right? The upcomming week I am busy but maybe someone else has time to check if the listed functions are now supported and update the wiki page. Otherwise I will try to find some time for it in the week after (Mai 20th-26th). Cheers, Philipp ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
I've started the page. You can find information on the Calc development page (bottom). Thanks for the guidance, hopefully I (and maybe others) can complete the list soon and then decide if/when/how to start getting the most important functions implemented. Thanks again all, Joel On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Eike Rathke er...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Joel, On Friday, 2012-07-13 09:00:28 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I closed the bug as INVALID and put a comment on there. I also will move the list to the wiki, not sure where it's preferred to go or if I'm making a new wiki page. Thanks for the feedback Please create a new page, i.e. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc/Spreadsheet_Functions and link to it from http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc For overview, in http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc/Spreadsheet_Functions also place pointers to the pages that Regina mentioned in this thread, so we'll have it all in one place. Thanks Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Hi Joel, On Tuesday, 2012-07-17 08:36:22 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I've started the page. You can find information on the Calc development page (bottom). Thanks for the guidance, hopefully I (and maybe others) can complete the list soon and then decide if/when/how to start getting the most important functions implemented. Thanks for getting this started, I took the freedom and fiddled with it ;-) Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD pgpbuCxGMTLcO.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Nice, the updates make it quite a bit more functional. I noticed that most of the really useful functions are already well on their way to being implemented. Those cube functions...I've never even heard of. Otherwise, I think the users list was not very accurate, I think he had 25+ functions, I found a total of 14. Thanks again, Joel On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Eike Rathke er...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Joel, On Tuesday, 2012-07-17 08:36:22 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I've started the page. You can find information on the Calc development page (bottom). Thanks for the guidance, hopefully I (and maybe others) can complete the list soon and then decide if/when/how to start getting the most important functions implemented. Thanks for getting this started, I took the freedom and fiddled with it ;-) Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Hi Joel, On Wednesday, 2012-07-11 15:53:07 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I'd like to make a meta bug for functions that Excel has but that aren't currently supported or are problematic in Calc. This stems from FDO 47164: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47164 Taking Regina's answer this actually was about https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46918 For my takes on this topic see the mail I just sent to you and the QA list. And now we have the situation that cross-posting to multiple lists isn't always a good idea because each list doesn't know how things evolve on the other list, as answers on the QA list apparently did not include the dev list and vice versa. So, I'm including my answer here again: | On Friday, 2012-07-13 07:46:36 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: | | Thanks for responding Eike. Summary is that I was bug triaging and came | across a bug that had a list of functions in excel that are currently not | supported in LO. | | Cross-reading the dev list I found | https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46918 | with a nice attachment listing functions. | | 1. Leave excel bugs as is, keep that bug open with the list of functions, | in the comments I'll confirm individual functions as problematic in LO | (harder to track progress, harder for devs to pick up individual functions | out of the list) | | Better close the bug that otherwise would live for months and years and | end up with 300 comments or so that no one would read anyway.. better | add the there attached list (that would be outdated already after the | first function was implemented) to the wiki from which individual bugs | or implementation notes could be linked then. Such implement dozens of | features bugs weren't helpful at any time. | | 2. Leave excel bugs as is, close bug that has so many functions in one, | tell user that we need them as individual bug reports (easier to track | progress this way) | | We really don't need dozens of bugs open one for each function not | implemented. I'd rather prefer to open a bug for a specific function | only once a developer starts to implement it so we can (discuss if | necessary and) refer it in the commit summary when done. Also, if users | open bugs for functions they actually miss in their daily work it helps | us more than doing that ourself in advance for all functions we know. | | 3. Make a meta excel bug just for the functions, then I'll create | individual bugs for each bug listed by the user and make the meta bug | dependent on them (similar to most annoying) | | See above about my take on creating individual bugs, plus I don't see an | advantage in having a meta bug for this unless it would be there to have | a quick listing of its dependents. | | 4. Make a meta excel bug, separate the function bug into individual bug and | make meta bug dependent on ALL excel bugs (not just the functions one from | the original FDO) | | We might also use something like an interoperability whiteboard keyword | or some such to query for instead. | | Well, you may have deduced from my answers that I'm not a friend of meta | bugs, unless they are there to mail a pointer to the dev list like the | most annoying meta bugs. In short, it's ok for me if QA wants to create | a meta bug to track existing things, but opening a bunch of bugs to be | tracked just for the sake of having everything in that we _might_ want | to implement over time of years doesn't make sense to me. | | Michael CC'ed you on it because he said you're currently the go to for | excel compatibility. My argument is that anything to make it easier to be | fully compatible with Excel is a plus if the goal is to convince MS Office | users that we can provide a better product than MS can. | | Specifically when having dozens of bugs open for functions that only | a very minority of users would use anyway it would be counterproductive | pointing potential users to deficiencies they otherwise would even never | have noticed or heard of ;-) Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD pgpEfOAVu8lrE.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
I closed the bug as INVALID and put a comment on there. I also will move the list to the wiki, not sure where it's preferred to go or if I'm making a new wiki page. Thanks for the feedback Joel On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Eike Rathke er...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Joel, On Wednesday, 2012-07-11 15:53:07 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I'd like to make a meta bug for functions that Excel has but that aren't currently supported or are problematic in Calc. This stems from FDO 47164: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47164 Taking Regina's answer this actually was about https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46918 For my takes on this topic see the mail I just sent to you and the QA list. And now we have the situation that cross-posting to multiple lists isn't always a good idea because each list doesn't know how things evolve on the other list, as answers on the QA list apparently did not include the dev list and vice versa. So, I'm including my answer here again: | On Friday, 2012-07-13 07:46:36 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: | | Thanks for responding Eike. Summary is that I was bug triaging and came | across a bug that had a list of functions in excel that are currently not | supported in LO. | | Cross-reading the dev list I found | https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46918 | with a nice attachment listing functions. | | 1. Leave excel bugs as is, keep that bug open with the list of functions, | in the comments I'll confirm individual functions as problematic in LO | (harder to track progress, harder for devs to pick up individual functions | out of the list) | | Better close the bug that otherwise would live for months and years and | end up with 300 comments or so that no one would read anyway.. better | add the there attached list (that would be outdated already after the | first function was implemented) to the wiki from which individual bugs | or implementation notes could be linked then. Such implement dozens of | features bugs weren't helpful at any time. | | 2. Leave excel bugs as is, close bug that has so many functions in one, | tell user that we need them as individual bug reports (easier to track | progress this way) | | We really don't need dozens of bugs open one for each function not | implemented. I'd rather prefer to open a bug for a specific function | only once a developer starts to implement it so we can (discuss if | necessary and) refer it in the commit summary when done. Also, if users | open bugs for functions they actually miss in their daily work it helps | us more than doing that ourself in advance for all functions we know. | | 3. Make a meta excel bug just for the functions, then I'll create | individual bugs for each bug listed by the user and make the meta bug | dependent on them (similar to most annoying) | | See above about my take on creating individual bugs, plus I don't see an | advantage in having a meta bug for this unless it would be there to have | a quick listing of its dependents. | | 4. Make a meta excel bug, separate the function bug into individual bug and | make meta bug dependent on ALL excel bugs (not just the functions one from | the original FDO) | | We might also use something like an interoperability whiteboard keyword | or some such to query for instead. | | Well, you may have deduced from my answers that I'm not a friend of meta | bugs, unless they are there to mail a pointer to the dev list like the | most annoying meta bugs. In short, it's ok for me if QA wants to create | a meta bug to track existing things, but opening a bunch of bugs to be | tracked just for the sake of having everything in that we _might_ want | to implement over time of years doesn't make sense to me. | | Michael CC'ed you on it because he said you're currently the go to for | excel compatibility. My argument is that anything to make it easier to be | fully compatible with Excel is a plus if the goal is to convince MS Office | users that we can provide a better product than MS can. | | Specifically when having dozens of bugs open for functions that only | a very minority of users would use anyway it would be counterproductive | pointing potential users to deficiencies they otherwise would even never | have noticed or heard of ;-) Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Hi Joel, On Friday, 2012-07-13 09:00:28 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I closed the bug as INVALID and put a comment on there. I also will move the list to the wiki, not sure where it's preferred to go or if I'm making a new wiki page. Thanks for the feedback Please create a new page, i.e. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc/Spreadsheet_Functions and link to it from http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc For overview, in http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc/Spreadsheet_Functions also place pointers to the pages that Regina mentioned in this thread, so we'll have it all in one place. Thanks Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD pgpDBacWCIpm2.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Excel Function Meta Bug?
Hi Joel, Joel Madero schrieb: Hi All, I'd like to make a meta bug for functions that Excel has but that aren't currently supported or are problematic in Calc. This stems from FDO 47164: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47164 This here https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46918 ? The user has been nice enough to make a list, I can go one by one and verify that Calc isn't supporting, create an individual enhancement request for the function and then link it to the meta bug. Any opinions on this one? Appreciate the feedback. Please have a look at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Calc/Drafts/Treatment_of_new_Excel_2010_functions and the file http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/File:Compare_Function_Category_Excel_ODF_OOo.ods there and http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Calc/ODFF_Implementation/Examine_functions (which needs an update because some functions are implemented in the meantime) Please watch https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50488 and coordinate your work with Winfried Donkers. In addition the CWS calcishmakkica from the OpenOffice.org Summer 2010 Internship is still pending, therefore discuss with Eike, how to proceed. Kind regards Regina ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
