You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Peter Kovacs <le...@gmail.com> on 2017/05/18 18:49:35 UTC
Bugzilla
Hi,
Maybe this has been discussed already.
But how about setting up some volunteer process from support request to bug
report.
Instead of having people write wildly in our tech tracker we organize or
search the forum for bugs.
I think it might lead to more satisfaction for every one if we setup a
"support" process.
Maybe we can setup some tools to make the transition from a support thread
into a bug really easy for a supporter who is a while with us
I don't know I feel like we close 3 support requst for 1 issue. And I
wonder if we can setup a better strategy.
It is a general idea. Nothing that we can nor should do quickly and hasty.
What's your thought on this?
All the best
Peter
--
Disclaimer: Diese Nachricht stammt aus einem Google Account. Ihre Antwort
wird in der Google Cloud Gespeichert und durch Google Algorythmen zwecks
werbeanaöysen gescannt. Es ist derzeit nicht auszuschließen das ihre
Nachricht auch durch einen NSA Mitarbeiter geprüft wird. Durch
kommunikation mit diesen Account stimmen Sie zu das ihre Mail, ihre
Kontaktdaten und die Termine die Sie mit mir vereinbaren online zu Google
konditionen in der Googlecloud gespeichert wird. Sollten sie dies nicht
wünschen kontaktieren sie mich bitte Umgehend um z.B. alternativen zu
verhandeln.
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>.
I can give it a try (please bear in mind I read here out of curiosity, I'm
not a developer).
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> @esh1907:
> Are you ready to actually help here?
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Bugzilla
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
While security and releases are important, they are not the only issue that is going on.
Because I have some build issues I try to bridge my time to work on issue tracking from time to time.
Most of them we close down.
Imagine you bought Openoffice for 3 £ and something not working.
You wasted money and time. Maybe one or 2 days you bug around without any knowledge.
For some reason you end up in Bugzilla. Where your user issue gets closed with the reasoning "not an issue"
If you are not to frustrated you will see the hint pointer to our dev list, and forums. Still this excuse did cost us transparency and resources.
Where does security or releases play a role in this?
What is the solution to this?
Maybe this perspective gives again another reason why I started the Bugzilla Thread.
However the List got stuck quickly with other problems which seem to be more interesting / important to the dev community.
Even this point might be seem minor to some, I think we can work on a solution and improve the process. (And enjoy a small improvement)
Releases and security will stay hot topics for a while.
I don't see which steps can be done to improve the situation for security and releases. You said you need another week until 4.1.4 has reached maturity for release.
Security I have brought up (in an awkward way) and it's beeing now discussed by people in charge, how this can be processed.
I hope this helps.
Peter
Am 26. Mai 2017 23:00:08 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>:
>
>> On May 20, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> Le 20/05/2017 à 12:10, Peter Kovacs a écrit :
>>> Our best recruitment base is our user base. The more we use them the
>tighter the link between user and developer gets, the more probable it
>is we get people.
>>> Community feeling is a strong motivator for doing the right thing.
>> Well, remember that the user base of applications like AOO is not the
>same as for other more geek-oriented application in OpenSource field.
>We face mostly basic users who wants things done at no cost and with
>equivalent features to MS Office ones for example. They don't have any
>knowledge nor will to engage very far.
>> According to what we see in the forum, it's rather difficult to even
>make them file a bug report.
>
>Our *best* recruitment is how we *TREAT* our user base, which, IMO,
>means ensuring known release schedules as well as opportune releases in
>short
>order to fix security concerns.
>
>Anyone who has "stuck" with AOO deserves, IMO and with own personal hat
>on, much better respect than we have been giving to them.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On May 20, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Le 20/05/2017 à 12:10, Peter Kovacs a écrit :
>> Our best recruitment base is our user base. The more we use them the tighter the link between user and developer gets, the more probable it is we get people.
>> Community feeling is a strong motivator for doing the right thing.
> Well, remember that the user base of applications like AOO is not the same as for other more geek-oriented application in OpenSource field. We face mostly basic users who wants things done at no cost and with equivalent features to MS Office ones for example. They don't have any knowledge nor will to engage very far.
> According to what we see in the forum, it's rather difficult to even make them file a bug report.
Our *best* recruitment is how we *TREAT* our user base, which, IMO,
means ensuring known release schedules as well as opportune releases in short
order to fix security concerns.
Anyone who has "stuck" with AOO deserves, IMO and with own personal hat
on, much better respect than we have been giving to them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>.
About the locate (from the wayback machine):
https://web.archive.org/web/20040610062016/http://projects.openoffice.org:80/accepted.html
About the convince:
IMHO a personal meeting with a German volunteer is best.
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> If you can see a way to make this happen, it would be very helpful. Even
> having someone familiar with the source code available as a consultant
> would help.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 5/20/2017 7:32 AM, esh1907 wrote:
> Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during
> Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
If you can see a way to make this happen, it would be very helpful. Even
having someone familiar with the source code available as a consultant
would help.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Am .05.2017, 19:15 Uhr, schrieb Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>:
> Le 20/05/2017 à 18:07, Raphael Bircher a écrit :
>> But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back
>> (normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not
>> attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money.
>> We should start getting attractive for companies.
>
> The only one I would see is Canonical. But i still don't understand why
> they chose LibO.
> What other company would invest money in a MS Office competitor???
> In addition to the investment in the development (meaning manpower cost
> but also the time needed to get the equivalent features they already
> have in MS Office), there would also be the training of the users, the
> migration of the existing tools and files (especially macros) and the
> problem of the format interoperability with the people this company
> deals with.
> That's too much for companies to think about it IMHO. Or perhaps Google
> but what for?
The main problem is, that we have no good reason to invest in OpenOffice.
Since years, we just run behind MS Office. But we never get beyond a good
copy of MS Office. License cost free is not a feature. The only benefit
OpenOffice offers, is that it runs on 3 Operating system with the same
code. this gives a base line in the program witch MS O lakes. We avoid a
load of compatibility issue with this.
>
> Is there any company that invests substantially in LibO BTW (just a
> question, I really don't know)?
> When I see all the migrations (mostly to LibO because it's much more
> dynamic and they are good at marketing their project), I just see bodies
> (often administrations) who want to cut costs but without major
> investment, they just take it because it serves their cause but I doubt
> there is any will to go further for them (I mean dedicate manpower to
> help the project).
That was a big mistake of the old OpenOffice Marketing. They promote
mostly the cost freeness. And they promote that you can save the License
expense. On the first look, this is true, but on the second view id didn't
work at all. With Open Source you save no license cost, because you need
the money to bring the project forward.
For my point of view, saving money is a bad reason to use Open Source.
>
> I thought when OOo was given to Apache that the licensing would give
> interest to the project for companies but it did not happen at all. Less
> restrictive licensing attracts most of the devs. This is part of the
> world evolution today I guess: people want more free sharing, or at
> least want to avoid that their code can be used for commercial when they
> give it for free.
The license only don't generate commercial interest. It needs an
interesting Project for company, and it looks, we are not at the moment.
At the moment, the OpenOffice Project don't give companies the opportunity
to make money.
This will probably change as sonn as
- there exist easy ways to do a 3rd party version
- there is a substantial interest of Users investing money.
--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>.
Many companies were affected in the recent cyber attack.
It shouldn't be hard to find a company sick of Microsoft...
Why not Deutsche Bahn or Renault for example?
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The only one I would see is Canonical. But i still don't understand why
> they chose LibO.
> What other company would invest money in a MS Office competitor???
>
> So I'm not very optimistic.
> Hopefully someone has brighter clues.
>
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>.
Le 20/05/2017 à 18:07, Raphael Bircher a écrit :
> But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back (normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money. We should start getting attractive for companies.
The only one I would see is Canonical. But i still don't understand why they chose LibO.
What other company would invest money in a MS Office competitor???
In addition to the investment in the development (meaning manpower cost but also the time needed to get the equivalent features they already have in MS Office), there would also be the training of the users, the migration of the existing tools and files (especially macros) and the problem of the format interoperability with the people this company deals with.
That's too much for companies to think about it IMHO. Or perhaps Google but what for?
Is there any company that invests substantially in LibO BTW (just a question, I really don't know)?
When I see all the migrations (mostly to LibO because it's much more dynamic and they are good at marketing their project), I just see bodies (often administrations) who want to cut costs but without major investment, they just take it because it serves their cause but I doubt there is any will to go further for them (I mean dedicate manpower to help the project).
I thought when OOo was given to Apache that the licensing would give interest to the project for companies but it did not happen at all. Less restrictive licensing attracts most of the devs. This is part of the world evolution today I guess: people want more free sharing, or at least want to avoid that their code can be used for commercial when they give it for free.
So I'm not very optimistic.
Hopefully someone has brighter clues.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 5/20/2017 1:43 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Hi Patricia
>
> Am .05.2017, 22:04 Uhr, schrieb Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>:
...
>> A retired Sun or StarOffice person who understands how the code is
>> put together could save me a lot of time. My current low level
>> objective is to find where to put a break point to intercept a
>> double click on OLE substitute text. A few minutes of e-mail
>> response from someone who knows, or knows how to find out, might
>> save me hours or days. The same would apply to the professional
>> developers you want.
> I don't think, that this people are already retired, they are not
> old enough. And people from the pre SUN time bring not a load of
> benefit. Most of the code has changed since 1998. AFAIK one of the
> oldest part is the build in file picker (not the native one) He goes
> back to 199x.
Hmmm. I distinctly remember Sun picking up StarOffice, and I was working
for Sun as a large server performance architect at the time. I retired
in 2002. I was able to retire early because of Sun stock options I sold
in 2000, something that happened to a lot of senior developers at Sun.
Even without that, I would be retired by now, age 68.
> But what I want to say, we should not waste the time and try to
> restore the old project. OpenOffice is old, in the IT world very old.
> Things change from time to time. I don't say to scrap the old model
> immediately. Maybe we should invite people from the whole ASF to
> discuss how a modern Office Suite looks like. I believe we are to
> strong focused on the old concept. Sometimes this blocks new ideas
> and scares also companies with new ideas away.
That sounds sufficiently different that it should be run as a separate
project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On May 20, 2017, at 5:11 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We do need to handle security issues.
>
++1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
Honestly I agree with Dave.
It does not help us. I think for now let Libre and Apache go different ways.
That is the outcome of the past.
Am 21. Mai 2017 17:02:43 MESZ schrieb Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
>
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 21, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>>
>>> Meh had some misstatements of fact,
>>
>> And why are we silent about this?
>
>The misstatements are minor. Dennis's name and the count of Google fuzz
>on LO is an order of magnitude too low. It is >300.
>
>>
>> If AOO were my project, I would defend myself against such statements
>legally.
>>
>> As a community, we can not defend ourselves legally, but we should
>defend ourselves publicly.
>>
>>> but the description of
>>> other projects was interesting. I don't care to correct the
>>> misstatements.
>>>
>>> We have work to do here. Onward!
>>
>> And the TDF should apologize for the FUD of the past and dissociate
>oneself from the people who are today FUD! Public and clear!
>
>If you care about this then you should discuss on the TDF lists as an
>individual. I don't see how it will help us get developers here.
>
>Regards,
>Dave
>
>>
>>
>> greetings,
>> Jörg
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
> > And the TDF should apologize for the FUD of the past and
> dissociate oneself from the people who are today FUD! Public
> and clear!
>
> If you care about this then you should discuss on the TDF
> lists as an individual.
This is not my task. This can do the ones that say the TDF would have changed!
However, I will defend on our mailing list AOO against attacks from outside!
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 21, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>
>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>
>> Meh had some misstatements of fact,
>
> And why are we silent about this?
The misstatements are minor. Dennis's name and the count of Google fuzz on LO is an order of magnitude too low. It is >300.
>
> If AOO were my project, I would defend myself against such statements legally.
>
> As a community, we can not defend ourselves legally, but we should defend ourselves publicly.
>
>> but the description of
>> other projects was interesting. I don't care to correct the
>> misstatements.
>>
>> We have work to do here. Onward!
>
> And the TDF should apologize for the FUD of the past and dissociate oneself from the people who are today FUD! Public and clear!
If you care about this then you should discuss on the TDF lists as an individual. I don't see how it will help us get developers here.
Regards,
Dave
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
> Meh had some misstatements of fact,
And why are we silent about this?
If AOO were my project, I would defend myself against such statements legally.
As a community, we can not defend ourselves legally, but we should defend ourselves publicly.
> but the description of
> other projects was interesting. I don't care to correct the
> misstatements.
>
> We have work to do here. Onward!
And the TDF should apologize for the FUD of the past and dissociate oneself from the people who are today FUD! Public and clear!
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Waiting for an apology that's never going to come is not going to help.
Meh had some misstatements of fact, but the description of other projects was interesting. I don't care to correct the misstatements.
We have work to do here. Onward!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 21, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>
>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>
>> Reread what Simon wrote. Key phrase is those who work on both.
>>
>> Also IBM as a company left the project 2.5 years ago and Rob
>> left a year ago.
>
> Have the TDF members ever apologized for their insults to Rob (and other Apache members)?
> Has the TDF ever criticized those who spread FUD over AOO?
>
>> In this case it is not helpful to reopen
>> these hurts and past issues.
>
> I think that LO and AOO are two independent projects and that both have their right to existence.
>
> Some LO members, on the other hand, think it should only be LO, and that LO is the successor to OOo. We can not accept this because the truth is the OpenOffice is the original and LO is the fork.
>
> What does TDF do? Where does it call for reconciliation? Where does it criticize its own community members to spread FUD?
>
>
> Did you read what was written of "Meh" today? Where is the criticism of the TDF against such mailing list posts?
>
> And please understand that such statements, as she pronounced "Meh", should damage AOO.
>
> And tell me: where are the AOO members doing the same on LO mailing lists? I do not see anyone.
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
PLEASE. These types of threads, whether valid or not, are completely
orthogonal to the issue at hand and the *real* topic being discussed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
> Reread what Simon wrote. Key phrase is those who work on both.
>
> Also IBM as a company left the project 2.5 years ago and Rob
> left a year ago.
Have the TDF members ever apologized for their insults to Rob (and other Apache members)?
Has the TDF ever criticized those who spread FUD over AOO?
> In this case it is not helpful to reopen
> these hurts and past issues.
I think that LO and AOO are two independent projects and that both have their right to existence.
Some LO members, on the other hand, think it should only be LO, and that LO is the successor to OOo. We can not accept this because the truth is the OpenOffice is the original and LO is the fork.
What does TDF do? Where does it call for reconciliation? Where does it criticize its own community members to spread FUD?
Did you read what was written of "Meh" today? Where is the criticism of the TDF against such mailing list posts?
And please understand that such statements, as she pronounced "Meh", should damage AOO.
And tell me: where are the AOO members doing the same on LO mailing lists? I do not see anyone.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Jörg,
Reread what Simon wrote. Key phrase is those who work on both.
Also IBM as a company left the project 2.5 years ago and Rob left a year ago. In this case it is not helpful to reopen these hurts and past issues.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 21, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>
>> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 2:46 PM
>
>> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Jörg Schmidt
>
>> Repeating untrue statements
>
> This is not an untrue statement.
>
>> TDF has moved on
>
> I have experienced how high members of the TDF called Rob Weir as liars and attacked other members of Apache.
> And the same people want to see AOO dead today.
>
>
>
> Jörg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 2:46 PM
> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Jörg Schmidt
> Repeating untrue statements
This is not an untrue statement.
> TDF has moved on
I have experienced how high members of the TDF called Rob Weir as liars and attacked other members of Apache.
And the same people want to see AOO dead today.
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>.
Jörg
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
> Today the TDF is not independent, but depends on several companies,
> instead of one. These companies may also be very community-friendly, but
> again there is dependency and this dependency is actively exploited.
>
Please stop, this is poisonous. None of us who volunteer in both projects
recognise the description you (and you alone) keep giving of TDF and LO.
Repeating untrue statements like these over and over discourages
involvement by creating a hostile environment and promotes division. TDF
has moved on; it's time you did too.
Simon
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:peter.kovacs@posteo.de]
> Imho that's is what you have to do if you want to go into
> commerce. And after we have rebuild the community we might
> need to build or invite a commerce entity, too. Without hard
> feelings. ;)
>
> What was the whish that the ooo community wanted, in your opinion?
A truly independent foundation.
Please note: SUN was a very very community-friendly company, but SUN did not allow any independent community, and the community wanted to change it with an independent foundation.
Today the TDF is not independent, but depends on several companies, instead of one. These companies may also be very community-friendly, but again there is dependency and this dependency is actively exploited.
> I think this is just my crazy idea.
> And I think a focus on a participant community is a way to
> make us special for others to get involved.
I did not mean the idea is crazy.
> What would be your way?
Any time to work with the forces that we have concretely. We should not set priorities that can be misunderstood as conditions.
What I would like is a community that is aware of the necessity of its independence, but is not afraid to work with companies.
I mean:
A strong community is even stronger by the help of companies,
but a weak community is further weakened by the interference of companies.
greetings,
Jörg
> >
> >
> >
> >Gruß
> >Jörg
> Gruss zurück
> Peter
Oh, I see, I have greeted in German, that was no special purpose, only coincidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
See below:
Am 21. Mai 2017 10:01:17 MESZ schrieb "Jörg Schmidt" <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>:
>
>> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:peter.kovacs@posteo.de]
>
>> Imho looking for Companies & Investors is the route Libre is moving.
>
>One word:
>The TDF is not the kind of foundation that the OOo community once
>wanted. The TDF is a money and PR machine for companies and LO is as
>dependent on these companies as once OOo of Oracle or Sun.
>I see people in the LO-community who work a lot but have little to say.
>Well-known people, who once advanced OpenOffice.org and enjoyed respect
>there.
Imho that's is what you have to do if you want to go into commerce. And after we have rebuild the community we might need to build or invite a commerce entity, too. Without hard feelings. ;)
What was the whish that the ooo community wanted, in your opinion?
>
>> I don't think doing the same is smart.
>> I would rather prefer the opposite direction and focus on
>> community building.
>> And that is something we can do without any programmer skills.
>> We can claim that we are not bound today to anyone. The
>> structure of Apache makes sure of that, I think this is
>> something we differ a lot from TDF and we should utilize.
>> Also I think we should try to do a bit of old school Open
>> Source. No market focus for devs, rather go for the tech thingy.
>> I think we have to much competition on our minds.
>
>This would not be my way, but if developers want to follow this path,
>and a good software is generated, then this good software (relatively)
>automatically gets market meaning.
>Therefore, I will _not_ contradict this way, when it is the way which
>the developers want.
I think this is just my crazy idea.
And I think a focus on a participant community is a way to make us special for others to get involved.
What would be your way?
>
>
>
>Gruß
>Jörg
Gruss zurück
Peter
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:peter.kovacs@posteo.de]
> Imho looking for Companies & Investors is the route Libre is moving.
One word:
The TDF is not the kind of foundation that the OOo community once wanted. The TDF is a money and PR machine for companies and LO is as dependent on these companies as once OOo of Oracle or Sun.
I see people in the LO-community who work a lot but have little to say. Well-known people, who once advanced OpenOffice.org and enjoyed respect there.
> I don't think doing the same is smart.
> I would rather prefer the opposite direction and focus on
> community building.
> And that is something we can do without any programmer skills.
> We can claim that we are not bound today to anyone. The
> structure of Apache makes sure of that, I think this is
> something we differ a lot from TDF and we should utilize.
> Also I think we should try to do a bit of old school Open
> Source. No market focus for devs, rather go for the tech thingy.
> I think we have to much competition on our minds.
This would not be my way, but if developers want to follow this path, and a good software is generated, then this good software (relatively) automatically gets market meaning.
Therefore, I will _not_ contradict this way, when it is the way which the developers want.
Gruß
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Project organisation (was Re: Bugzilla)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
I do not disagree, Raphael.
However I believe in making one step after another.
First step is building up a core community. (Maybe it is there I just to blind to see it)
If we have that we found a community organisation And stabilized our current situation, we can make the next step.
We should stick to the idea we discussed at FOSDEM.
For me it is important that we have some devs and some people from user base.
That it is purely community focused, without any commerce involvement.
After we have that up and running we can check for a seperate commercial partner / unit.
In this step I would heavily involve the Apache Foundation because they have great experience in dealing with business contracts.
I have not come by to grade a charta that our community organisation needs. :(
Maybe we can do that together?
Am 21. Mai 2017 11:33:08 MESZ schrieb Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>:
>Hi Peter
>
>Am .05.2017, 08:34 Uhr, schrieb Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>:
>
>> There are enough offices around.
>We have enough office suites who run all into the same direction, yes.
>But
>I think there is room for much more different office solution. Spend
>some
>time and read the feature request on Bugzilla. You will soon realize
>that
>many feature request bite each other. You can do one or the other, but
>not
>both. Office suites to day are nasty compromises. If you have specific
>
>versions for specific user groups, you could solve so many problems.
>
>> There is no point in starting from the scratch without any plan or
>> vision.
>I think, I have arguments for this.
>>
>> Imho looking for Companies & Investors is the route Libre is moving.
>> I don't think doing the same is smart.
>> I would rather prefer the opposite direction and focus on community
>> building.
>And you want to do this only with volunteers? I say forget it. If AOO
>runs
>well, we have about 80 mails on the dev Mailing list per day. A pure
>Volunteer simply can't keep up with this load and still develop. An
>other
>problem is that you will get volunteers. But as soon they doing great
>work, they receive a Job offer from companies, and you will never see
>them
>again. No we need the companies. This is part of community building. We
>
>can maybe hold this version with non professional, but not improve it.
>
>Believe me we tryed it many times in the past. The native port of Mac
>OS X
>was the last real non company driven bigger improvement in OOo. And it
>
>would not be there, if not SUN jumped in with two devs to finish it.
>
>> And that is something we can do without any programmer skills.
>> We can claim that we are not bound today to anyone. The structure of
>
>> Apache makes sure of that, I think this is something we differ a lot
>
>> from TDF and we should utilize.
>> Also I think we should try to do a bit of old school Open Source. No
>
>> market focus for devs, rather go for the tech thingy.
>> I think we have to much competition on our minds.
>>
>> We have something that is a challenge to master. Especially our bugs.
>> I think there are developers out there that are fed up with the way
>open
>> source works today.
>> Had a colleague talked on Friday, who told me exactly that. I stay
>with
>> him in touch now. Who knows maybe he joins someday. (No promises)
>>
>> I think if you take a look at today's capability of c++ it is an
>awesome
>> language.
>> Our problem is not the language but we use different ones.
>> I am personally impressed by other languages too.
>> But the more different languages I use the more I am convinced that
>the
>> language used does not matter. The concept, architecture and tooling
>
>> does.
>> We need more helpers that simplify work, development wise.
>> I also suggest to not trying to fix one bug, but by solving a bug and
>
>> uplift our code.
>>
>> All the best
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> Am 21. Mai 2017 05:48:00 MESZ schrieb Patricia Shanahan
><pa...@acm.org>:
>>> On 5/20/2017 2:11 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We
>>>> do need to handle security issues.
>>>>
>>>> If we want start a rewrite for a 5.x then we will need to map the
>>>> functionality particularly in Calc. We will also need to pick a
>more
>>>> modern language compared to C++. We now have an XML schema which
>can
>>>> help us generate code. We did this for Java in Apache POI. The ODF
>>>> Toolkit is also still in the Incubator and it could be of use.
>>>>
>>>> I think we should all think about it a little and then have a
>series
>>>> of video conferences reporting back to the community with a
>synopsis
>>>> step by step.
>>>
>>> I can see a case for creating a new project to build a modern office
>>> suite from scratch, if there are enough interested people to make it
>>> viable.
>>>
>>> I strongly disagree with calling it "OpenOffice" or assigning it an
>>> OpenOffice version number, for the following reasons:
>>>
>>> 1. Doing so would create an expectation of compatibility that would
>>> limit the options for the new suite.
>>>
>>> 2. Depending on how quickly the new suite is developed, and, after
>>> release, its download rate relative to OpenOffice, we may want to
>>> produce an actual OpenOffice 5.x. Using "OpenOffice 5.x" for the new
>>> suite would limit the actual OpenOffice to 4.y, no matter how large
>y
>>> gets, or how long demand for OpenOffice continues.
>>>
>>> 3. If you look at what I wrote above, using "OpenOffice" for the new
>>> suite makes it very difficult to write clearly about the differences
>>> between it and the current OpenOffice line.
>>>
>>> I suggest that the people interested in writing new office suite
>should
>>> pick a project name and either create an incubator podling or, if
>there
>>> are enough members involved, create a new top level project.
>>>
>>>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Peter
Am .05.2017, 08:34 Uhr, schrieb Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>:
> There are enough offices around.
We have enough office suites who run all into the same direction, yes. But
I think there is room for much more different office solution. Spend some
time and read the feature request on Bugzilla. You will soon realize that
many feature request bite each other. You can do one or the other, but not
both. Office suites to day are nasty compromises. If you have specific
versions for specific user groups, you could solve so many problems.
> There is no point in starting from the scratch without any plan or
> vision.
I think, I have arguments for this.
>
> Imho looking for Companies & Investors is the route Libre is moving.
> I don't think doing the same is smart.
> I would rather prefer the opposite direction and focus on community
> building.
And you want to do this only with volunteers? I say forget it. If AOO runs
well, we have about 80 mails on the dev Mailing list per day. A pure
Volunteer simply can't keep up with this load and still develop. An other
problem is that you will get volunteers. But as soon they doing great
work, they receive a Job offer from companies, and you will never see them
again. No we need the companies. This is part of community building. We
can maybe hold this version with non professional, but not improve it.
Believe me we tryed it many times in the past. The native port of Mac OS X
was the last real non company driven bigger improvement in OOo. And it
would not be there, if not SUN jumped in with two devs to finish it.
> And that is something we can do without any programmer skills.
> We can claim that we are not bound today to anyone. The structure of
> Apache makes sure of that, I think this is something we differ a lot
> from TDF and we should utilize.
> Also I think we should try to do a bit of old school Open Source. No
> market focus for devs, rather go for the tech thingy.
> I think we have to much competition on our minds.
>
> We have something that is a challenge to master. Especially our bugs.
> I think there are developers out there that are fed up with the way open
> source works today.
> Had a colleague talked on Friday, who told me exactly that. I stay with
> him in touch now. Who knows maybe he joins someday. (No promises)
>
> I think if you take a look at today's capability of c++ it is an awesome
> language.
> Our problem is not the language but we use different ones.
> I am personally impressed by other languages too.
> But the more different languages I use the more I am convinced that the
> language used does not matter. The concept, architecture and tooling
> does.
> We need more helpers that simplify work, development wise.
> I also suggest to not trying to fix one bug, but by solving a bug and
> uplift our code.
>
> All the best
> Peter
>
>
> Am 21. Mai 2017 05:48:00 MESZ schrieb Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>:
>> On 5/20/2017 2:11 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> ...
>>> We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We
>>> do need to handle security issues.
>>>
>>> If we want start a rewrite for a 5.x then we will need to map the
>>> functionality particularly in Calc. We will also need to pick a more
>>> modern language compared to C++. We now have an XML schema which can
>>> help us generate code. We did this for Java in Apache POI. The ODF
>>> Toolkit is also still in the Incubator and it could be of use.
>>>
>>> I think we should all think about it a little and then have a series
>>> of video conferences reporting back to the community with a synopsis
>>> step by step.
>>
>> I can see a case for creating a new project to build a modern office
>> suite from scratch, if there are enough interested people to make it
>> viable.
>>
>> I strongly disagree with calling it "OpenOffice" or assigning it an
>> OpenOffice version number, for the following reasons:
>>
>> 1. Doing so would create an expectation of compatibility that would
>> limit the options for the new suite.
>>
>> 2. Depending on how quickly the new suite is developed, and, after
>> release, its download rate relative to OpenOffice, we may want to
>> produce an actual OpenOffice 5.x. Using "OpenOffice 5.x" for the new
>> suite would limit the actual OpenOffice to 4.y, no matter how large y
>> gets, or how long demand for OpenOffice continues.
>>
>> 3. If you look at what I wrote above, using "OpenOffice" for the new
>> suite makes it very difficult to write clearly about the differences
>> between it and the current OpenOffice line.
>>
>> I suggest that the people interested in writing new office suite should
>> pick a project name and either create an incubator podling or, if there
>> are enough members involved, create a new top level project.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
There are enough offices around.
There is no point in starting from the scratch without any plan or vision.
Imho looking for Companies & Investors is the route Libre is moving.
I don't think doing the same is smart.
I would rather prefer the opposite direction and focus on community building.
And that is something we can do without any programmer skills.
We can claim that we are not bound today to anyone. The structure of Apache makes sure of that, I think this is something we differ a lot from TDF and we should utilize.
Also I think we should try to do a bit of old school Open Source. No market focus for devs, rather go for the tech thingy.
I think we have to much competition on our minds.
We have something that is a challenge to master. Especially our bugs.
I think there are developers out there that are fed up with the way open source works today.
Had a colleague talked on Friday, who told me exactly that. I stay with him in touch now. Who knows maybe he joins someday. (No promises)
I think if you take a look at today's capability of c++ it is an awesome language.
Our problem is not the language but we use different ones.
I am personally impressed by other languages too.
But the more different languages I use the more I am convinced that the language used does not matter. The concept, architecture and tooling does.
We need more helpers that simplify work, development wise.
I also suggest to not trying to fix one bug, but by solving a bug and uplift our code.
All the best
Peter
Am 21. Mai 2017 05:48:00 MESZ schrieb Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>:
>On 5/20/2017 2:11 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>...
>> We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We
>> do need to handle security issues.
>>
>> If we want start a rewrite for a 5.x then we will need to map the
>> functionality particularly in Calc. We will also need to pick a more
>> modern language compared to C++. We now have an XML schema which can
>> help us generate code. We did this for Java in Apache POI. The ODF
>> Toolkit is also still in the Incubator and it could be of use.
>>
>> I think we should all think about it a little and then have a series
>> of video conferences reporting back to the community with a synopsis
>> step by step.
>
>I can see a case for creating a new project to build a modern office
>suite from scratch, if there are enough interested people to make it
>viable.
>
>I strongly disagree with calling it "OpenOffice" or assigning it an
>OpenOffice version number, for the following reasons:
>
>1. Doing so would create an expectation of compatibility that would
>limit the options for the new suite.
>
>2. Depending on how quickly the new suite is developed, and, after
>release, its download rate relative to OpenOffice, we may want to
>produce an actual OpenOffice 5.x. Using "OpenOffice 5.x" for the new
>suite would limit the actual OpenOffice to 4.y, no matter how large y
>gets, or how long demand for OpenOffice continues.
>
>3. If you look at what I wrote above, using "OpenOffice" for the new
>suite makes it very difficult to write clearly about the differences
>between it and the current OpenOffice line.
>
>I suggest that the people interested in writing new office suite should
>pick a project name and either create an incubator podling or, if there
>are enough members involved, create a new top level project.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 5/20/2017 2:11 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
...
> We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We
> do need to handle security issues.
>
> If we want start a rewrite for a 5.x then we will need to map the
> functionality particularly in Calc. We will also need to pick a more
> modern language compared to C++. We now have an XML schema which can
> help us generate code. We did this for Java in Apache POI. The ODF
> Toolkit is also still in the Incubator and it could be of use.
>
> I think we should all think about it a little and then have a series
> of video conferences reporting back to the community with a synopsis
> step by step.
I can see a case for creating a new project to build a modern office
suite from scratch, if there are enough interested people to make it viable.
I strongly disagree with calling it "OpenOffice" or assigning it an
OpenOffice version number, for the following reasons:
1. Doing so would create an expectation of compatibility that would
limit the options for the new suite.
2. Depending on how quickly the new suite is developed, and, after
release, its download rate relative to OpenOffice, we may want to
produce an actual OpenOffice 5.x. Using "OpenOffice 5.x" for the new
suite would limit the actual OpenOffice to 4.y, no matter how large y
gets, or how long demand for OpenOffice continues.
3. If you look at what I wrote above, using "OpenOffice" for the new
suite makes it very difficult to write clearly about the differences
between it and the current OpenOffice line.
I suggest that the people interested in writing new office suite should
pick a project name and either create an incubator podling or, if there
are enough members involved, create a new top level project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi -
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 20, 2017, at 4:43 PM, Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Patricia
>
> Am .05.2017, 22:04 Uhr, schrieb Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>:
>
>> On 5/20/2017 9:07 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> Am .05.2017, 16:32 Uhr, schrieb esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during
>>>> Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
>>>
>>> I think this is the wrong way to go. We can't get the good old time
>>> back. What we need is fresh business blood. Not companies who use
>>> OpenOffice, Companies who help develop the project. Without this we will
>>> face a slow dead. A project in this size need professional developers.
>>>
>>> But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back
>>> (normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not
>>> attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money.
>>> We should start getting attractive for companies.
>>
>> We may need both. If a company got interested in AOO today, they would be presented with the same problem as I'm fighting: a large, complicated body of code that seems to have been modified by separate departments - just because I find out how something works in writer, it does not mean I know how it works in calc.
>>
>> A retired Sun or StarOffice person who understands how the code is put together could save me a lot of time. My current low level objective is to find where to put a break point to intercept a double click on OLE substitute text. A few minutes of e-mail response from someone who knows, or knows how to find out, might save me hours or days. The same would apply to the professional developers you want.
> I don't think, that this people are already retired, they are not old enough. And people from the pre SUN time bring not a load of benefit. Most of the code has changed since 1998. AFAIK one of the oldest part is the build in file picker (not the native one) He goes back to 199x.
>
> But you are right, the ex people from SUN would be value. If the commercial situation of Apache OpenOffice changes, we can maybe get some of them back.
>
> But what I want to say, we should not waste the time and try to restore the old project. OpenOffice is old, in the IT world very old. Things change from time to time. I don't say to scrap the old model immediately. Maybe we should invite people from the whole ASF to discuss how a modern Office Suite looks like. I believe we are to strong focused on the old concept. Sometimes this blocks new ideas and scares also companies with new ideas away.
We have way too many users to abandon the 4.x branch completely. We do need to handle security issues.
If we want start a rewrite for a 5.x then we will need to map the functionality particularly in Calc. We will also need to pick a more modern language compared to C++. We now have an XML schema which can help us generate code. We did this for Java in Apache POI. The ODF Toolkit is also still in the Incubator and it could be of use.
I think we should all think about it a little and then have a series of video conferences reporting back to the community with a synopsis step by step.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Regards, Raphael
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
> --
> My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Patricia
Am .05.2017, 22:04 Uhr, schrieb Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>:
> On 5/20/2017 9:07 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> Am .05.2017, 16:32 Uhr, schrieb esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work
>>> during
>>> Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
>>
>> I think this is the wrong way to go. We can't get the good old time
>> back. What we need is fresh business blood. Not companies who use
>> OpenOffice, Companies who help develop the project. Without this we will
>> face a slow dead. A project in this size need professional developers.
>>
>> But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back
>> (normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not
>> attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money.
>> We should start getting attractive for companies.
>
> We may need both. If a company got interested in AOO today, they would
> be presented with the same problem as I'm fighting: a large, complicated
> body of code that seems to have been modified by separate departments -
> just because I find out how something works in writer, it does not mean
> I know how it works in calc.
>
> A retired Sun or StarOffice person who understands how the code is put
> together could save me a lot of time. My current low level objective is
> to find where to put a break point to intercept a double click on OLE
> substitute text. A few minutes of e-mail response from someone who
> knows, or knows how to find out, might save me hours or days. The same
> would apply to the professional developers you want.
I don't think, that this people are already retired, they are not old
enough. And people from the pre SUN time bring not a load of benefit. Most
of the code has changed since 1998. AFAIK one of the oldest part is the
build in file picker (not the native one) He goes back to 199x.
But you are right, the ex people from SUN would be value. If the
commercial situation of Apache OpenOffice changes, we can maybe get some
of them back.
But what I want to say, we should not waste the time and try to restore
the old project. OpenOffice is old, in the IT world very old. Things
change from time to time. I don't say to scrap the old model immediately.
Maybe we should invite people from the whole ASF to discuss how a modern
Office Suite looks like. I believe we are to strong focused on the old
concept. Sometimes this blocks new ideas and scares also companies with
new ideas away.
Regards, Raphael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 5/20/2017 9:07 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Am .05.2017, 16:32 Uhr, schrieb esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during
>> Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
>
> I think this is the wrong way to go. We can't get the good old time
> back. What we need is fresh business blood. Not companies who use
> OpenOffice, Companies who help develop the project. Without this we will
> face a slow dead. A project in this size need professional developers.
>
> But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back
> (normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not
> attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money.
> We should start getting attractive for companies.
We may need both. If a company got interested in AOO today, they would
be presented with the same problem as I'm fighting: a large, complicated
body of code that seems to have been modified by separate departments -
just because I find out how something works in writer, it does not mean
I know how it works in calc.
A retired Sun or StarOffice person who understands how the code is put
together could save me a lot of time. My current low level objective is
to find where to put a break point to intercept a double click on OLE
substitute text. A few minutes of e-mail response from someone who
knows, or knows how to find out, might save me hours or days. The same
would apply to the professional developers you want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Hi all
Am .05.2017, 16:32 Uhr, schrieb esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>:
> Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during
> Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
I think this is the wrong way to go. We can't get the good old time back.
What we need is fresh business blood. Not companies who use OpenOffice,
Companies who help develop the project. Without this we will face a slow
dead. A project in this size need professional developers.
But companies don't com just to put money in, they want something back
(normally). SUN and IBM was a big exception. The point is, we are not
attractive for Companies at the moment. There is no room to make money. We
should start getting attractive for companies.
Regards, Raphael
--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>.
Maybe we should try to locate and convince people who used to work during
Star and Sun Microsystems to rejoin the project?
Perhaps instead of votes users can offer monetary compensation for solving
bugs (many users offering a tiny sum each can result in a reasonable
incentive)?
What about merging in developers from other projects like Gnumeric or
AbiWord?
For sure we should strive to be unique. No point in having two LibO...
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Le 20/05/2017 à 12:10, Peter Kovacs a écrit :
>
>> Our best recruitment base is our user base. The more we use them the
>> tighter the link between user and developer gets, the more probable it is
>> we get people.
>> Community feeling is a strong motivator for doing the right thing.
>>
> Well, remember that the user base of applications like AOO is not the same
> as for other more geek-oriented application in OpenSource field. We face
> mostly basic users who wants things done at no cost and with equivalent
> features to MS Office ones for example. They don't have any knowledge nor
> will to engage very far.
> According to what we see in the forum, it's rather difficult to even make
> them file a bug report.
>
> And people we have, we lack imho skill. And this we need to build. We need
>> to open ways into open office development. Set starting points with view
>> little knowledge and need to slowly guide the volunteers to the deeper end
>> of our projects.
>>
>> Currently we don't have roads like I described above, we only have a fast
>> and frightening jungle.
>>
> Personally, I've very little knowledge of Basic macros (I sometimes
> help/improve macros in the forum) and I'm a fan of AOO but doing code (I
> mean for development) is not in my intention at all, that's too huge a step.
> So, yes, quite a frightening jungle.
> Let's face it: LibO seems to be doing better to get devs (that's how I see
> it from the outside, I don't know how true it is in reality). So what is
> the AOO plan exactly? I guess that committers want to invest their time in
> a project that has a future so that their own work can last in that project.
> Should AOO be focused on stability and robustness (and less on new
> features)? Or should it try to keep up with LibO (at least by implementing
> features not that hard to code and are considered must have in LibO)?...
>
> Getting users to evaluate what is a bug and what is not would be in my
>> eyes a huge step forward.
>>
> This is something we do in the forum. We help them investigate and we urge
> them to file a report when we can confirm there is indeed a bug (some forum
> volunteers even file the bug themselves when the user is not willing).
>
> Of course the next step would be solving them. But for that we can vote,
>> measure or find other ways to promote them
>>
> As said in my other message, votes are cast in bugzilla. However, in the
> forum we did see a clear trend: in the past, users bothered to subscribe
> bugzilla to vote. They don't anymore. They clearly switch to something
> else (be it LibO or MS Office).
>
> Maybe slicing them up in micro jobs would work for some.
>> Setting up a bazaar another.
>>
>> I would like to take one step after another.
>> And only do things we think that they work with people we have.
>> Because I do believe in that we need to do things in order that people
>> join.
>>
> For sure.
> What people do see is that there is quite few development and little bug
> solving. It does not help to restore trust in the project.
> But again, look at this list: https://forum.openoffice.org/e
> n/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17677#p81363
> I raised this issue several times on this list and still nothing. Think of
> how users talk about AOO after having lost files that way.
> I do know that it is not an easy one but it is the kind of bug that
> definitively damages AOO reputation. Finding the root cause and fixing it
> (or changing the save process to avoid it) would be enough to release a new
> major version. That would send a clear message that the community listen to
> the users.
> For the record, I don't have any skills to help devs. However, we spent
> some time with forum volunteers trying to find a hint, but nothing
> interesting so far.
>
> All the best
>> Peter
>>
> +1.
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>.
Le 20/05/2017 à 12:10, Peter Kovacs a écrit :
> Our best recruitment base is our user base. The more we use them the tighter the link between user and developer gets, the more probable it is we get people.
> Community feeling is a strong motivator for doing the right thing.
Well, remember that the user base of applications like AOO is not the same as for other more geek-oriented application in OpenSource field. We face mostly basic users who wants things done at no cost and with equivalent features to MS Office ones for example. They don't have any knowledge nor will to engage very far.
According to what we see in the forum, it's rather difficult to even make them file a bug report.
> And people we have, we lack imho skill. And this we need to build. We need to open ways into open office development. Set starting points with view little knowledge and need to slowly guide the volunteers to the deeper end of our projects.
>
> Currently we don't have roads like I described above, we only have a fast and frightening jungle.
Personally, I've very little knowledge of Basic macros (I sometimes help/improve macros in the forum) and I'm a fan of AOO but doing code (I mean for development) is not in my intention at all, that's too huge a step.
So, yes, quite a frightening jungle.
Let's face it: LibO seems to be doing better to get devs (that's how I see it from the outside, I don't know how true it is in reality). So what is the AOO plan exactly? I guess that committers want to invest their time in a project that has a future so that their own work can last in that project.
Should AOO be focused on stability and robustness (and less on new features)? Or should it try to keep up with LibO (at least by implementing features not that hard to code and are considered must have in LibO)?...
> Getting users to evaluate what is a bug and what is not would be in my eyes a huge step forward.
This is something we do in the forum. We help them investigate and we urge them to file a report when we can confirm there is indeed a bug (some forum volunteers even file the bug themselves when the user is not willing).
> Of course the next step would be solving them. But for that we can vote, measure or find other ways to promote them
As said in my other message, votes are cast in bugzilla. However, in the forum we did see a clear trend: in the past, users bothered to subscribe bugzilla to vote. They don't anymore. They clearly switch to something else (be it LibO or MS Office).
> Maybe slicing them up in micro jobs would work for some.
> Setting up a bazaar another.
>
> I would like to take one step after another.
> And only do things we think that they work with people we have.
> Because I do believe in that we need to do things in order that people join.
For sure.
What people do see is that there is quite few development and little bug solving. It does not help to restore trust in the project.
But again, look at this list: https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17677#p81363
I raised this issue several times on this list and still nothing. Think of how users talk about AOO after having lost files that way.
I do know that it is not an easy one but it is the kind of bug that definitively damages AOO reputation. Finding the root cause and fixing it (or changing the save process to avoid it) would be enough to release a new major version. That would send a clear message that the community listen to the users.
For the record, I don't have any skills to help devs. However, we spent some time with forum volunteers trying to find a hint, but nothing interesting so far.
> All the best
> Peter
+1.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
Our best recruitment base is our user base. The more we use them the tighter the link between user and developer gets, the more probable it is we get people.
Community feeling is a strong motivator for doing the right thing.
And people we have, we lack imho skill. And this we need to build. We need to open ways into open office development. Set starting points with view little knowledge and need to slowly guide the volunteers to the deeper end of our projects.
Currently we don't have roads like I described above, we only have a fast and frightening jungle.
Getting users to evaluate what is a bug and what is not would be in my eyes a huge step forward.
Of course the next step would be solving them. But for that we can vote, measure or find other ways to promote them
Maybe slicing them up in micro jobs would work for some.
Setting up a bazaar another.
I would like to take one step after another.
And only do things we think that they work with people we have.
Because I do believe in that we need to do things in order that people join.
All the best
Peter
Am 20. Mai 2017 10:14:11 MESZ schrieb Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>:
>Am 20.05.2017 um 06:23 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>>> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
>>
>>> absolutely, we need volunteers that would then work on these bug
>>> reports. Assumed they *are* valid bugs and not "how can I do this
>and
>>> that" questions. ;-)
>>
>> yes, right, but that's not what I mean.
>
>maybe, but I was talking about more than just developers. Sure, we need
>
>more but we need also man-power to work on the additional reports.
>Currently we have a large number of them open and it won't get less in
>the future when the proposal comes true. ;-)
>
>> I mean we need developers who fix the bugs. And there are two
>problems:
>>
>> (a)
>> We do not have enough developers (ok, we have to see what the future
>brings)
>>
>> (b)
>> The existing developers work voluntarily and do what they want - how
>do we get them to fix _specific_ bugs?
>> Please understand what I mean: there are issues (respectively bug
>reports) that are important for the users, but not interesting for the
>developers. How do we motivate developers to work on _these_ issues?
>
>In project of volunteers we haven't hard arguments to say what one
>"has"
>to do (like salary, promotion, more things that work well in the
>private
>economy business).
>
>But in general, I would also expect that there is a base of
>self-motivation and an eye for the important things.
>
>> btw:
>> A spontaneous suggestion for (b)
>>
>> We could put 50 issues to vote for each release of OO separately and
>fix the 10 which get the most votes from users.
>> By this I do not mean to fix only 10 bugs per release, but the
>developer's willingness to fix 10 specific bugs, which interest the
>users, in addition to fixed, no matter whether the developers keep
>these bugs important.
>
>The votes can be a good start. To generate a list of intersting and
>valuable (for the users) things to fix or implement.
>
>Marcus
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Release Cycle( was Re: Bugzilla)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
I agree we are round about at 1 release per year.
We should target reliable 2 releases per year cycle.
Important releases as needed.
I think that cycle would be tough for us.
Am 21. Mai 2017 16:34:31 MESZ schrieb "Jörg Schmidt" <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>:
>
>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>
>> Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
>>
>> (1) investigate and fix security holes.
>
>+1
>
>> (2) frequent releases.
>
>+-0 or -1
>
>In practice, a time interval of 12-15 months would be sufficient.
>
>Note: the release cycle of LO is much too short, even if this is always
>presented as an advantage.
>I could write "imho", but the truth is that the one is a tangible
>practice problem for professional office users. Because I offer
>commercial support for OO and LO, I know what I'm talking about.
>
>> (3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
>
>+-0
>
>Do you know the story of the hare and the hedgehog?
>http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm187.html
>
>
>Yes, the users want that, but would not it be right and honest to tell
>the users:
>'if you want MS Office, then use MS Office and not OO'
>
>> (4) deconflicted feature requests.
>
>I do not know what you mean specifically with "deconflicted".
>
>
>> What do people think?
>
>I think _in the present situation_ it is better to work more and to
>discuss less.
>
>I am unfortunately not a programmer of OO, but I support the project
>with user support, as a member of the project www.prooo-box.org and as
>a moderator in the forum http://openoffice.org.
>I have regularly supported the project through translations of the
>release notes into the German language.
>
>
>
>greetings,
>Jörg
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Security (was bugzilla)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
Since this is getting into specifics of security issues, I think it
should be moved to the security list.
On 5/22/2017 1:22 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Well, I see only 2 attack path for us.
> Ssh interface and the macro/scripting interface.
>
> SSH or web we need to update libs, so wee need a flexible way to reference both.
>
> Scripting I don't know, not my area of expertise. Anyone with insights?
>
> Please note I start splitting because we get more and more OT.
>
> Am 21. Mai 2017 17:10:16 MESZ schrieb Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On May 21, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>>>
>>>> Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
>>>>
>>>> (1) investigate and fix security holes.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>> (2) frequent releases.
>>>
>>> +-0 or -1
>>>
>>> In practice, a time interval of 12-15 months would be sufficient.
>>
>> More frequent releases are needed for two reasons.
>>
>> - security fixes
>> - making sure we have several people who can be release manager.
>>
>> Feature releases can be on an interval you describe.
>>
>>>
>>> Note: the release cycle of LO is much too short, even if this is
>> always presented as an advantage.
>>> I could write "imho", but the truth is that the one is a tangible
>> practice problem for professional office users. Because I offer
>> commercial support for OO and LO, I know what I'm talking about.
>>>
>>>> (3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
>>>
>>> +-0
>>>
>>> Do you know the story of the hare and the hedgehog?
>> http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm187.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, the users want that, but would not it be right and honest to
>> tell the users:
>>> 'if you want MS Office, then use MS Office and not OO'
>>
>> Users want to convert to AOO but cannot easily. Users want to share
>> with friends on MSFT. Having a great divide is not tenable. Perhaps
>> this is an extension.
>>
>>>
>>>> (4) deconflicted feature requests.
>>>
>>> I do not know what you mean specifically with "deconflicted".
>>
>> Raphael mentioned that feature requests bite each other. In
>> prioritizing these we should pick which way.
>>>
>>>
>>>> What do people think?
>>>
>>> I think _in the present situation_ it is better to work more and to
>> discuss less.
>>
>> Agreed, but I'd still like to know what others think.
>>
>>>
>>> I am unfortunately not a programmer of OO, but I support the project
>> with user support, as a member of the project www.prooo-box.org and as
>> a moderator in the forum http://openoffice.org.
>>> I have regularly supported the project through translations of the
>> release notes into the German language.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> greetings,
>>> Jörg
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Security (was bugzilla)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de>.
Well, I see only 2 attack path for us.
Ssh interface and the macro/scripting interface.
SSH or web we need to update libs, so wee need a flexible way to reference both.
Scripting I don't know, not my area of expertise. Anyone with insights?
Please note I start splitting because we get more and more OT.
Am 21. Mai 2017 17:10:16 MESZ schrieb Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
>
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 21, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>>
>>> Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
>>>
>>> (1) investigate and fix security holes.
>>
>> +1
>>
>>> (2) frequent releases.
>>
>> +-0 or -1
>>
>> In practice, a time interval of 12-15 months would be sufficient.
>
>More frequent releases are needed for two reasons.
>
>- security fixes
>- making sure we have several people who can be release manager.
>
>Feature releases can be on an interval you describe.
>
>>
>> Note: the release cycle of LO is much too short, even if this is
>always presented as an advantage.
>> I could write "imho", but the truth is that the one is a tangible
>practice problem for professional office users. Because I offer
>commercial support for OO and LO, I know what I'm talking about.
>>
>>> (3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
>>
>> +-0
>>
>> Do you know the story of the hare and the hedgehog?
>http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm187.html
>>
>>
>> Yes, the users want that, but would not it be right and honest to
>tell the users:
>> 'if you want MS Office, then use MS Office and not OO'
>
>Users want to convert to AOO but cannot easily. Users want to share
>with friends on MSFT. Having a great divide is not tenable. Perhaps
>this is an extension.
>
>>
>>> (4) deconflicted feature requests.
>>
>> I do not know what you mean specifically with "deconflicted".
>
>Raphael mentioned that feature requests bite each other. In
>prioritizing these we should pick which way.
>>
>>
>>> What do people think?
>>
>> I think _in the present situation_ it is better to work more and to
>discuss less.
>
>Agreed, but I'd still like to know what others think.
>
>>
>> I am unfortunately not a programmer of OO, but I support the project
>with user support, as a member of the project www.prooo-box.org and as
>a moderator in the forum http://openoffice.org.
>> I have regularly supported the project through translations of the
>release notes into the German language.
>
>Thank you.
>
>Regards,
>Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> greetings,
>> Jörg
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 21, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>
>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
>
>> Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
>>
>> (1) investigate and fix security holes.
>
> +1
>
>> (2) frequent releases.
>
> +-0 or -1
>
> In practice, a time interval of 12-15 months would be sufficient.
More frequent releases are needed for two reasons.
- security fixes
- making sure we have several people who can be release manager.
Feature releases can be on an interval you describe.
>
> Note: the release cycle of LO is much too short, even if this is always presented as an advantage.
> I could write "imho", but the truth is that the one is a tangible practice problem for professional office users. Because I offer commercial support for OO and LO, I know what I'm talking about.
>
>> (3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
>
> +-0
>
> Do you know the story of the hare and the hedgehog? http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm187.html
>
>
> Yes, the users want that, but would not it be right and honest to tell the users:
> 'if you want MS Office, then use MS Office and not OO'
Users want to convert to AOO but cannot easily. Users want to share with friends on MSFT. Having a great divide is not tenable. Perhaps this is an extension.
>
>> (4) deconflicted feature requests.
>
> I do not know what you mean specifically with "deconflicted".
Raphael mentioned that feature requests bite each other. In prioritizing these we should pick which way.
>
>
>> What do people think?
>
> I think _in the present situation_ it is better to work more and to discuss less.
Agreed, but I'd still like to know what others think.
>
> I am unfortunately not a programmer of OO, but I support the project with user support, as a member of the project www.prooo-box.org and as a moderator in the forum http://openoffice.org.
> I have regularly supported the project through translations of the release notes into the German language.
Thank you.
Regards,
Dave
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
> Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
>
> (1) investigate and fix security holes.
+1
> (2) frequent releases.
+-0 or -1
In practice, a time interval of 12-15 months would be sufficient.
Note: the release cycle of LO is much too short, even if this is always presented as an advantage.
I could write "imho", but the truth is that the one is a tangible practice problem for professional office users. Because I offer commercial support for OO and LO, I know what I'm talking about.
> (3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
+-0
Do you know the story of the hare and the hedgehog? http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm187.html
Yes, the users want that, but would not it be right and honest to tell the users:
'if you want MS Office, then use MS Office and not OO'
> (4) deconflicted feature requests.
I do not know what you mean specifically with "deconflicted".
> What do people think?
I think _in the present situation_ it is better to work more and to discuss less.
I am unfortunately not a programmer of OO, but I support the project with user support, as a member of the project www.prooo-box.org and as a moderator in the forum http://openoffice.org.
I have regularly supported the project through translations of the release notes into the German language.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Jörg,
To think positively what should be the project's development goals? I think if we are going to attract developers and companies we need an agenda or rough roadmap.
Here are some of mine. I am sure others differ.
(1) investigate and fix security holes.
(2) frequent releases.
(3) near one to one conversion to and from Microsoft Office.
(4) deconflicted feature requests.
What do people think?
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
On May 21, 2017, at 3:36 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
>
>> maybe, but I was talking about more than just developers.
>> Sure, we need
>> more but we need also man-power to work on the additional reports.
>> Currently we have a large number of them open and it won't
>> get less in
>> the future when the proposal comes true. ;-)
>
> My answer is simple and very clear:
> Why should you edit bugreports (I mean in Bugzilla etc.) as long as you are _not_ sure, in continuation of this work, then also programmers fix the bugs?
>
> Sorry, this is my honest answer.
>
>> In project of volunteers we haven't hard arguments to say
>> what one "has"
>> to do (like salary, promotion, more things that work well in
>> the private
>> economy business).
>
> Interesting answer, because it makes a mistake of the ASF clear: there is no way to donate, for individual projects. (except for large single donations)
> _But this is not my topic today._
>
>> But in general, I would also expect that there is a base of
>> self-motivation and an eye for the important things.
>
> Perhaps, but: expectation is not reality and in reality there is this view (so far) not (imho).
>
> But I do not want to discuss further, because it makes no sense as long as the individual interests of the volunteers are defended against the interests of the project ... Sorry.
>
> Why is my answer so negative?
> Because I am longer than 10 years in the OpenOffice-project and always hear the same answers. Answers that do not bring us forward.
>
>
>
>
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
> maybe, but I was talking about more than just developers.
> Sure, we need
> more but we need also man-power to work on the additional reports.
> Currently we have a large number of them open and it won't
> get less in
> the future when the proposal comes true. ;-)
My answer is simple and very clear:
Why should you edit bugreports (I mean in Bugzilla etc.) as long as you are _not_ sure, in continuation of this work, then also programmers fix the bugs?
Sorry, this is my honest answer.
> In project of volunteers we haven't hard arguments to say
> what one "has"
> to do (like salary, promotion, more things that work well in
> the private
> economy business).
Interesting answer, because it makes a mistake of the ASF clear: there is no way to donate, for individual projects. (except for large single donations)
_But this is not my topic today._
> But in general, I would also expect that there is a base of
> self-motivation and an eye for the important things.
Perhaps, but: expectation is not reality and in reality there is this view (so far) not (imho).
But I do not want to discuss further, because it makes no sense as long as the individual interests of the volunteers are defended against the interests of the project ... Sorry.
Why is my answer so negative?
Because I am longer than 10 years in the OpenOffice-project and always hear the same answers. Answers that do not bring us forward.
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 20.05.2017 um 06:23 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
>
>> absolutely, we need volunteers that would then work on these bug
>> reports. Assumed they *are* valid bugs and not "how can I do this and
>> that" questions. ;-)
>
> yes, right, but that's not what I mean.
maybe, but I was talking about more than just developers. Sure, we need
more but we need also man-power to work on the additional reports.
Currently we have a large number of them open and it won't get less in
the future when the proposal comes true. ;-)
> I mean we need developers who fix the bugs. And there are two problems:
>
> (a)
> We do not have enough developers (ok, we have to see what the future brings)
>
> (b)
> The existing developers work voluntarily and do what they want - how do we get them to fix _specific_ bugs?
> Please understand what I mean: there are issues (respectively bug reports) that are important for the users, but not interesting for the developers. How do we motivate developers to work on _these_ issues?
In project of volunteers we haven't hard arguments to say what one "has"
to do (like salary, promotion, more things that work well in the private
economy business).
But in general, I would also expect that there is a base of
self-motivation and an eye for the important things.
> btw:
> A spontaneous suggestion for (b)
>
> We could put 50 issues to vote for each release of OO separately and fix the 10 which get the most votes from users.
> By this I do not mean to fix only 10 bugs per release, but the developer's willingness to fix 10 specific bugs, which interest the users, in addition to fixed, no matter whether the developers keep these bugs important.
The votes can be a good start. To generate a list of intersting and
valuable (for the users) things to fix or implement.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>.
Le 20/05/2017 à 06:23, Jörg Schmidt a écrit :
> (a)
> We do not have enough developers (ok, we have to see what the future brings)
Well, that's the key point I guess.
> (b)
> The existing developers work voluntarily and do what they want - how do we get them to fix _specific_ bugs?
> Please understand what I mean: there are issues (respectively bug reports) that are important for the users, but not interesting for the developers. How do we motivate developers to work on _these_ issues?
>
> [...]
>
> We could put 50 issues to vote for each release of OO separately and fix the 10 which get the most votes from users.
> By this I do not mean to fix only 10 bugs per release, but the developer's willingness to fix 10 specific bugs, which interest the users, in addition to fixed, no matter whether the developers keep these bugs important.
Who would cast a vote? Users? I doubt they would engage again in such process. They already can vote for bugs. Some have hundreds of votes and nothing is done. What "trust" they could have in a new list to vote on? Or it should at least be a list of bugs acknowledged to be solvable with the limited resources still at hand.
For the record, in the forum, we tag all the topics that deals with a reported issue, it's easy to spot them, they have the [Issue] tag in the topic title and the red flame as icon, see this query: https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/search.php?keywords=Issue&terms=all&author=&sc=1&sf=titleonly&sr=topics&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
They key point is IMHO the motivation from free resources (not very coordinated). We cannot force people to work on specific bugs. What is at stake for devs? Fame? Pair recognition? Drilling by improving something big (AOO) in the meantime?
Users point of view, I see 2 key bugs that are too frequent in the users forum:
- Files reduced to ### (may require core code change linked to the save process)
- Dictionary lost (resetting the profile is a mere workaround). The bug was closed but I doubt the fix was really one since we still see this very often.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
Hello,
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
> absolutely, we need volunteers that would then work on these bug
> reports. Assumed they *are* valid bugs and not "how can I do this and
> that" questions. ;-)
yes, right, but that's not what I mean.
I mean we need developers who fix the bugs. And there are two problems:
(a)
We do not have enough developers (ok, we have to see what the future brings)
(b)
The existing developers work voluntarily and do what they want - how do we get them to fix _specific_ bugs?
Please understand what I mean: there are issues (respectively bug reports) that are important for the users, but not interesting for the developers. How do we motivate developers to work on _these_ issues?
greetings,
Jörg
btw:
A spontaneous suggestion for (b)
We could put 50 issues to vote for each release of OO separately and fix the 10 which get the most votes from users.
By this I do not mean to fix only 10 bugs per release, but the developer's willingness to fix 10 specific bugs, which interest the users, in addition to fixed, no matter whether the developers keep these bugs important.
Such an approach would increase user satisfaction ... and perhaps there will be another chance for the future:
Interested developers can (externally) create a kind of OpenOffice-crowdfunding - an online overview with issues and for each issue a certain donation sum - if the users donate this sum, the issue is immediately fixed.
This is a bit similar to Raphael's suggestion, but it is very concrete, concrete money for the removal of concrete bugs.
This also means (or can olso mean) small donations for small bugs, for example, 20 euros for removing an incorrect label on a button.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 19.05.2017 um 19:52 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:leginee@gmail.com]
>
>> Maybe this has been discussed already.
>> But how about setting up some volunteer process from support
>> request to bug
>> report.
>>
>> Instead of having people write wildly in our tech tracker we
>> organize or
>> search the forum for bugs.
>> I think it might lead to more satisfaction for every one if we setup a
>> "support" process.
>> Maybe we can setup some tools to make the transition from a
>> support thread
>> into a bug really easy for a supporter who is a while with us
>>
>> I don't know I feel like we close 3 support requst for 1 issue. And I
>> wonder if we can setup a better strategy.
>>
>> It is a general idea. Nothing that we can nor should do
>> quickly and hasty.
>>
>> What's your thought on this?
>
> a good idea
>
> a good idea
>
> But I think it is essential that we then also eliminate bugs concretely.
> Too often, we have the users promised, if they report any errors we will take care of it. Unfortunately, the users were always disappointed, already at OpenOffice.org was so.
absolutely, we need volunteers that would then work on these bug
reports. Assumed they *are* valid bugs and not "how can I do this and
that" questions. ;-)
@esh1907:
Are you ready to actually help here?
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
Hello,
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:leginee@gmail.com]
> Maybe this has been discussed already.
> But how about setting up some volunteer process from support
> request to bug
> report.
>
> Instead of having people write wildly in our tech tracker we
> organize or
> search the forum for bugs.
> I think it might lead to more satisfaction for every one if we setup a
> "support" process.
> Maybe we can setup some tools to make the transition from a
> support thread
> into a bug really easy for a supporter who is a while with us
>
> I don't know I feel like we close 3 support requst for 1 issue. And I
> wonder if we can setup a better strategy.
>
> It is a general idea. Nothing that we can nor should do
> quickly and hasty.
>
> What's your thought on this?
a good idea
a good idea
But I think it is essential that we then also eliminate bugs concretely.
Too often, we have the users promised, if they report any errors we will take care of it. Unfortunately, the users were always disappointed, already at OpenOffice.org was so.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by Hagar Delest <de...@gmail.com>.
Le 19/05/2017 à 13:04, esh1907 a écrit :
> IMHO good idea.
> Our suite should have a "Report a Bug" in Help menu under "About
> OpenOffice".
I don't think such option would be first very visible and second very used.
> The average user shouldn't reach a cumbersome platform like Bugzilla to
> report a bug.
Perhaps the UI could be simplified but on the other hand, it helps to precisely narrow the code involved. And even if the report is not well filled-in, volunteers afterward can add details.
For the record, there is a tutorial on the forum: https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=13490
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bugzilla
Posted by esh1907 <es...@gmail.com>.
IMHO good idea.
Our suite should have a "Report a Bug" in Help menu under "About
OpenOffice".
The average user shouldn't reach a cumbersome platform like Bugzilla to
report a bug.
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Peter Kovacs <le...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Maybe this has been discussed already.
> But how about setting up some volunteer process from support request to bug
> report.
>
> Instead of having people write wildly in our tech tracker we organize or
> search the forum for bugs.
> I think it might lead to more satisfaction for every one if we setup a
> "support" process.
> Maybe we can setup some tools to make the transition from a support thread
> into a bug really easy for a supporter who is a while with us
>
> I don't know I feel like we close 3 support requst for 1 issue. And I
> wonder if we can setup a better strategy.
>
> It is a general idea. Nothing that we can nor should do quickly and hasty.
>
> What's your thought on this?
>
> All the best
> Peter
> --
>
> Disclaimer: Diese Nachricht stammt aus einem Google Account. Ihre Antwort
> wird in der Google Cloud Gespeichert und durch Google Algorythmen zwecks
> werbeanaöysen gescannt. Es ist derzeit nicht auszuschließen das ihre
> Nachricht auch durch einen NSA Mitarbeiter geprüft wird. Durch
> kommunikation mit diesen Account stimmen Sie zu das ihre Mail, ihre
> Kontaktdaten und die Termine die Sie mit mir vereinbaren online zu Google
> konditionen in der Googlecloud gespeichert wird. Sollten sie dies nicht
> wünschen kontaktieren sie mich bitte Umgehend um z.B. alternativen zu
> verhandeln.
>