Hi :) Why then do you not engage with actually helping people on the Users Mailing List when they write in with some problem?
You seem to be saying that because it's a community project that every person should be involved with every part of it. So, lets see you solve some problems for users. Regard from Tom :) On 2 October 2014 16:22, Charles-H. Schulz < [email protected]> wrote: > Le 02.10.2014 17:04, Tom Davies a écrit : > >> Hi :) >> I don't think that bullying users is particularly clever or productive. >> > > bullying? > > >> Lets take a completely different scenario as an example. Lets say that >> someone buys a can-opener. They use it and like it so at Christmas they >> buy a new one as a present for a friend. The new one doesn't work. The >> person takes the opener back to the shop and gets told that they should >> have paid a few thousand on the research&development of the new one and >> that it's the users fault for the can-opener being broken. >> >> Ridiculous right? >> > > > Yes indeed. And that is indeed a completely different example you're > taking, because you are comparing buying apples to being part of a > community project developing a software. > > Best, > > Charles. > > > Regards form >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> On 2 October 2014 15:39, Sophie <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Charles, >>> Le 02/10/2014 15:50, Tanstaafl a écrit : >>> > On 10/2/2014 8:58 AM, Werner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> No one suggested that users should have to pay. >>> > >>> > You obviously haven't read this entire thread. Florian is trying to >>> > extort money from me to fix this major regression. >>> >>> ha ha, this one made me laugh, I imagine Florian... really you don't >>> mean what you wrote. >>> > >>> >> But it might be interesting for a certain user to get a >>> >> bug/feature/regression fixed ASAP and therefore having the option is >>> >> in my view great. >>> > >>> > As I said - suggesting a user pay for enhancements is one thing, and >>> one >>> > I agree wholeheartedly with. >>> > >>> > Major regressions, on the other hand, are a very different issue, and >>> > your lumping them together is just plain disingenuous. >>> >>> so concerned as you are, you're following the new features page on the >>> wiki and test the areas they may impact you, don't you? And then test >>> daily builds to see if your bugs are fixed and there is no regressions? >>> > >>> >> A regression should be dealt with, and in your case it has, just not >>> >> fast enough for you - but that is live. >>> > >>> > Yep... and the consequences, in this case, are that my biggest client >>> is >>> > seriously considering switching to Microsoft office, and because of the >>> > situation, caused purely by the Libreoffice devs refusal to fix the >>> > regression in a timely fashion, I have little ammunition to counter the >>> > push. I know no one here truly cares, but I do, and this is in fact the >>> > only reason I'm discussing this right now - meaning, I'm not a troll, >>> > I'm not here to just diss you guys or anything, I have what I consider >>> > to be very legitimate complaints about the way that this particular >>> > regression has, and is being, handled, and believe that (most of) the >>> > comments attempting to blame *me* for not 'ponying up' are irrelevant, >>> > invalid, and in some cases, extremely objectionable (see the paragraph >>> > following the next sentence as to why I take it as far as >>> 'objectionable'). >>> >>> So again, if you are concerned by regressions, you should follow what is >>> develop and what could have an impact for you. You can even write a >>> regression test that I can put on our manual tests system. You don't >>> need to wait for things to happen by themselves. >>> > >>> > Obviously, some of the volunteers here disagree, but on that note... >>> > >>> > I am also very aware that a very good number of the actual Libreoffice >>> > developers are paid to work on it (some full, some part) time, so it >>> > isn't like Libreoffice is a *purely* volunteer effort. In fact, it is, >>> > most likely, much too big of a project to survive on a purely volunteer >>> > basis, so please stop talking as if this were the case - it isn't. >>> >>> Yes but paid by whom? >>> > >>> >> If I where you I would just test the proposed fix in the daily build >>> to >>> >> make sure it is fixed the way you expect it to get fixed. >>> > >>> > Oh, I will be doing this as soon as time permits, but for the last 3 >>> > weeks, my plate has been full, and again, since I reverted to 4.1.6 way >>> > back when, the bug hasn't on the front burner. >>> >>> Oh so who's gonna do the work? QA volunteers again will do the work for >>> your company... >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Sophie >>> >>> -- >>> Sophie Gautier [email protected] >>> Tel:+33683901545 >>> Co-founder - Release coordinator >>> The Document Foundation >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe 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 >>> >>> > -- > To unsubscribe 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 > -- To unsubscribe 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
