In news:[email protected], webmaster for Kracked Press Productions <[email protected]> typed: > Question: Which version of LibreOffice are you using? > 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2? Many issues/bugs have been fixed in the > 3.4.x line that has not yet been fixed in the 3.3.x line. > 3.4.x reads MS formats better, is one of the fixes in that line.
I've used/looked at/tested out about every version since 2.whatever. They all read MS formats fine for me; no x__ stuff used. I'll reviisit 3.4.x since I never downloaded it, but something on the page made me take a pass on it but I can't remember what right now. I did look at the change list though and the changes didn't affect the carriy-over of bugs or anything on my list of problems. Seems like it was somethiing about stability? I'll recheck and download it though & see for myself. > > I kissed MSO completely on Feb. 2010 when I choose Ubuntu > as my OS on my new desktop. Then when LibreOffice came > out I kissed OpenOffice.org goodbye. Those are my intentiions too but for the 'nixes I've come up against other walls, namely a lack of apps and drivers both. ... > > As for releasing software with "bugs", this is normal, > even with MS products. But MS fixes their bugs and will continue to do so until 2014 in my case. I am trying to get them to think about the problem that lost them a lof of people in OOo, most of which are still in LO, and if you read over to Alexander's post to me, there seems to be no plans to pick up the bugs and fix them. They're dangerously close to repeating OOo's mistakes. LO is better IMO but what it does not do is what it says it'll do. Many bugs are found in real world > testing that happens on some systems, but not others. When these bugs are > reported, they are placed on some type of "bug needing to > be fixed list". According to Alexander, no, that's not so. Again, see his post to me. Devs only want to write new code, not fix code, apparently not even their own. Then it is up to the individuals who do > the programming/developing [all volunteers] to choose No, not all volunteers. Several companies are actually contributing to the LO project. There is an excellent bit of support behind LO that way. > which bug they have the skills to fix. I was a mainframe > programmer. I was really good. I am not skilled in the > programming needed for developing/fixing code for > LibreOffice. Same here; my background/time doesn't allow me to be of any real help to them. I couldn't fix bugs if I had to. I want LO to succeed, but ... when OOo bugs are still happily sliding along all cozy in the code, well, that was OOo's problem, too, and it appears to be being repeated at LO. HTH, Twayne` > > We all hope that the next release has the bug fixed that > causes problems for some groups of users. Each release > does its best to have as many issues fixed as it can with > the fixed release schedule. With a fixed release > schedule, it give the developers/helpers/bug-fixers a > time line to do the work. Some bugs takes a long time to > find the code that is the problem. I was once told that the code base > for > LibreOffice [and OpenOffice.org] is 100's of thousands of > lines of code. Some are no longer used, while some are > in need of "cleaning up". The LibreOffice developers > took OpenOffice.org's open source code base and dedicated > themselves to cleaning up all the messy and bad coding > that was in the OOo code base. They did a lot of that > and made improvements and more functions/abilities in > their 3.3.0 release and came out with it before Oracle's > people came out with OOo's 3.3.0 package. Plus, the > tech-media stated that LibreOffice was a better product > from the volunteers for The Documents Foundation/ > LibreOffice than was put out by the paid employees [and > some volunteers] at Oracle. > To be honest, I was told that many of the bugs that are > annoying LibreOffice users can be traced back to the > original messed up core coding and the fixes placed on > top of that coding to make it work, instead of fixing > that core code that is not working correctly. That is > some of the hardest work for our volunteeers, to trace > and fix the core coding that should have been fixed long > time ago when it was developed during the time Sun > Microsystems "owned" the OpenOffice brand. > Our developers are all volunteers and they are doing the > best that they can. If Sun, and then Oracle, paid > employees working 8 hours a day 5 days a week was working > on developing/fixing/improving the OpenOffice.org product and did not do > as good of a job > putting out the 3.3.0 version of OOo as was put out with the all > volunteer package of LibreOffice, we have to give our > people a hand for all that they did to make LO better > than OOo. Our volunteers are doing the best job as > possible for volunteers and their limited amount of time > after they come home from their paid jobs. They deserve > out thanks for their dedication to making LibreOffice the > best they can make it with the limits to their time to do > the work. > Sorry for the band standing, but our volunteers are doing > everything they are able to do to make LibreOffice the best free MSO > alternative office package. > > On 08/26/2011 02:16 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: >> Le 25/08/11 19:37, Twayne a icrit : >> >> Hi Twayne, >> >>> I would love to tell MS to kiss my shiny metal >>> butt, but I can't as long as some of these serious bugs >>> continue to be ignored. One man can push one car; as >>> you're doing now, but not three or four at the same >>> time. All this is part of watching out for the future >>> of LO and being able to say its users are solidly >>> behind it. Anythng that doesn't work shouldn't have >>> been released until it does work. >> I fear you might have misunderstood how this project >> functions. Most of the bugs get fixed as and when >> someone decides that their "itch to scratch" is really >> starting to annoy them. The developers working as >> employees of some of the software companies involved in >> the LibreOffice project do not have set agendas with >> regard to bug fixing as such that I know of - no doubt >> they have their own internal work pressures and >> priorities to deal with before sorting out bug X or bug >> Y. Most of the volunteer developers participate in the >> project because they like developing, i.e. for fun. >> There's no fun involved in being told which bug to fix >> and why that particular bug should trump all others, in >> that case, they might as well go and develop something >> else. The fact of the matter is that there are still too >> few developers to be able to maintain the massive beast >> of code which LibreOffice represents. Add to that the >> fact that an even smaller number really know anything >> about the code base and how it works as a whole (i.e. >> where poking one thing causes the butterfly to explode >> on your screen 50,000 miles away). If you can live with the way the >> project functions, then >> you can live with the bugs. If not, then from a >> pragmatic point of view you can either do it yourself, >> pay someone to do it for you, or else come back to the >> project in a few months/years time to see if things have >> moved on in the direction you want. Alex -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
