You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> on 2013/03/14 09:56:45 UTC
A question about existing practices
Hello,
By a request in the forum (http://de.openoffice.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=61365), I get the information, the Issue #3959 was not implemented since 2002, although he has already received 355 votes.
(Note: the implementation of the issues is not particularly important to me, I personally have not even voted for it.)
I know it, earlier in OpenOffice, org, not practice was unfortunately votes cast for issues as direct, binding standard for their implementation to consider, But how is that today?.
It is clear to me the AOO is created by volunteers who choose their detailed tasks themselves, but should we not also be a concern comply with the interests of the users of AOO?
That would not only be of practical benefit to users, but would also enhance the reputation of AOO, as in the practice oriented project.
Why the latter is important?
I think because of the positive reputation of AOO in public grow the number of our supporters (sponsors, supporters, developers) will be.
My view:
We should not emulate LibreOffice because LibreOffice may be innovative, but public statements about quality and consistency of LibreOffice are devastating.
For example, the chairman of the FroDeV spoke (a German association for the promotion of free software) this publicly recently plain text, see:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
(Sorry only in German)
My questions are:
Are there any agreements which result to have the number of votes for an issue? Is there some agreement that a high number of votes to be reason, the implementation of Issues to be considered as a priority?
What is your basic view on this?
Greetings
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 20/03/2013 22:03, Rob Weir a écrit :
> My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
> anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
> are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
> and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
> dependent on Bugzilla votes.
Thanks.
That settles the matter then.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
> >>> anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
> >>> are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
> >>> and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
> >>> dependent on Bugzilla votes.
> >>
> >> Well, you can do both, sort of...showcase the item with the most
> >> votes, perhaps in a blog post, or a regular ML/forum feature,
> >> effectively asking: "Is anyone still concerned about this issue? Is
> >> anyone prepared to take ownership of this issue?"
> >>
> >
> > Won't work. If you ask a group of people that question and say that
> > the issues already received many votes, then they will replicate that
> > result due to anchoring bias:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
> >
> > So of course you'll see them say that the issues are still important.
> > We're seeing that bias even today.
> >
> > But the problem is our most frequently-requested features today,
> > namely iOS and Android support, are not even listed in Bugzilla as
> > issues.
> >
> > So my approach will be to not use Bugzilla issues at all.
> >
>
> Sorry, I should mention that I have no objections if you want to do
> something else. But IMHO if you do not reset the votes then it will
> take another decade for a RFE from today to have the same opportunity
> for votes as an issue from 2002. So going down that path is a
> exercise in futility as far as I can tell. Better to start from
> scratch with a well-designed survey.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ...and make it easy for users to participate! Short,
sweet, native languages, etc.
> That's my preference and choice,
> but I don't want to force it on anyone else if you have a different
> approach that makes sense to you.
>
> -Rob
>
> > -Rob
> >
> >> If the answer appears to be no to both, wipe out its votes and see if
> >> it creeps up again. Then proceed to the new most-voted item.
> >> Lather, rinse, repeat.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Achieving happiness requires the right combination of Zen and Zin."
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
>>> anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
>>> are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
>>> and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
>>> dependent on Bugzilla votes.
>>
>> Well, you can do both, sort of...showcase the item with the most
>> votes, perhaps in a blog post, or a regular ML/forum feature,
>> effectively asking: "Is anyone still concerned about this issue? Is
>> anyone prepared to take ownership of this issue?"
>>
>
> Won't work. If you ask a group of people that question and say that
> the issues already received many votes, then they will replicate that
> result due to anchoring bias:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
>
> So of course you'll see them say that the issues are still important.
> We're seeing that bias even today.
>
> But the problem is our most frequently-requested features today,
> namely iOS and Android support, are not even listed in Bugzilla as
> issues.
>
> So my approach will be to not use Bugzilla issues at all.
>
Sorry, I should mention that I have no objections if you want to do
something else. But IMHO if you do not reset the votes then it will
take another decade for a RFE from today to have the same opportunity
for votes as an issue from 2002. So going down that path is a
exercise in futility as far as I can tell. Better to start from
scratch with a well-designed survey. That's my preference and choice,
but I don't want to force it on anyone else if you have a different
approach that makes sense to you.
-Rob
> -Rob
>
>> If the answer appears to be no to both, wipe out its votes and see if
>> it creeps up again. Then proceed to the new most-voted item.
>> Lather, rinse, repeat.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
>> anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
>> are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
>> and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
>> dependent on Bugzilla votes.
>
> Well, you can do both, sort of...showcase the item with the most
> votes, perhaps in a blog post, or a regular ML/forum feature,
> effectively asking: "Is anyone still concerned about this issue? Is
> anyone prepared to take ownership of this issue?"
>
Won't work. If you ask a group of people that question and say that
the issues already received many votes, then they will replicate that
result due to anchoring bias:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
So of course you'll see them say that the issues are still important.
We're seeing that bias even today.
But the problem is our most frequently-requested features today,
namely iOS and Android support, are not even listed in Bugzilla as
issues.
So my approach will be to not use Bugzilla issues at all.
-Rob
> If the answer appears to be no to both, wipe out its votes and see if
> it creeps up again. Then proceed to the new most-voted item.
> Lather, rinse, repeat.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
> anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
> are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
> and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
> dependent on Bugzilla votes.
Well, you can do both, sort of...showcase the item with the most
votes, perhaps in a blog post, or a regular ML/forum feature,
effectively asking: "Is anyone still concerned about this issue? Is
anyone prepared to take ownership of this issue?"
If the answer appears to be no to both, wipe out its votes and see if
it creeps up again. Then proceed to the new most-voted item.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
> Top post.
>
> Since it's rather clear that there will never be any agreement about this,
> why doesn't PMC start a [Vote]?
> This topic is eating energy for nothing. There is no point arguing
> furthermore.
>
> If I understand correctly the problem (even if it was not exactly the
> initial point from Jörg), the basic question could be:
> Should the votes field be reset to 0 for all current bug reports?
>
> What it should possibly mean:
> Yes => votes are not representative of the users feedback and should not
> really be taken into account.
> No => votes are considered as representative of the users feedback, even old
> votes.
>
That would be rather silly, since no one has actually proposed setting
the votes to zero. Look at the title of the thread again. Do you see
any "[PROPOSAL]" there? Resetting the votes was just one option, out
of 5 or 6, that was brought up during a discussion.
My take away from the thread was that the preference is not to do
anything, and in effect continue to ignore the votes. Whether they
are reset or ignored is immaterial to me. I'll just work on better
and more accurate ways of getting user feedback, that are not
dependent on Bugzilla votes.
-Rob
> The users community is watching you...
>
> Hagar
>
>
>
> Le 14/03/2013 09:56, Jörg Schmidt a écrit :
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> By a request in the forum
>> (http://de.openoffice.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=61365), I get the
>> information, the Issue #3959 was not implemented since 2002, although he has
>> already received 355 votes.
>>
>> (Note: the implementation of the issues is not particularly important to
>> me, I personally have not even voted for it.)
>>
>> I know it, earlier in OpenOffice, org, not practice was unfortunately
>> votes cast for issues as direct, binding standard for their implementation
>> to consider, But how is that today?.
>>
>> It is clear to me the AOO is created by volunteers who choose their
>> detailed tasks themselves, but should we not also be a concern comply with
>> the interests of the users of AOO?
>> That would not only be of practical benefit to users, but would also
>> enhance the reputation of AOO, as in the practice oriented project.
>>
>> Why the latter is important?
>> I think because of the positive reputation of AOO in public grow the
>> number of our supporters (sponsors, supporters, developers) will be.
>>
>> My view:
>> We should not emulate LibreOffice because LibreOffice may be innovative,
>> but public statements about quality and consistency of LibreOffice are
>> devastating.
>> For example, the chairman of the FroDeV spoke (a German association for
>> the promotion of free software) this publicly recently plain text, see:
>>
>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
>> (Sorry only in German)
>>
>>
>>
>> My questions are:
>>
>> Are there any agreements which result to have the number of votes for an
>> issue? Is there some agreement that a high number of votes to be reason, the
>> implementation of Issues to be considered as a priority?
>>
>> What is your basic view on this?
>>
>>
>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Top post.
Since it's rather clear that there will never be any agreement about this, why doesn't PMC start a [Vote]?
This topic is eating energy for nothing. There is no point arguing furthermore.
If I understand correctly the problem (even if it was not exactly the initial point from Jörg), the basic question could be:
Should the votes field be reset to 0 for all current bug reports?
What it should possibly mean:
Yes => votes are not representative of the users feedback and should not really be taken into account.
No => votes are considered as representative of the users feedback, even old votes.
The users community is watching you...
Hagar
Le 14/03/2013 09:56, Jörg Schmidt a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> By a request in the forum (http://de.openoffice.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=61365), I get the information, the Issue #3959 was not implemented since 2002, although he has already received 355 votes.
>
> (Note: the implementation of the issues is not particularly important to me, I personally have not even voted for it.)
>
> I know it, earlier in OpenOffice, org, not practice was unfortunately votes cast for issues as direct, binding standard for their implementation to consider, But how is that today?.
>
> It is clear to me the AOO is created by volunteers who choose their detailed tasks themselves, but should we not also be a concern comply with the interests of the users of AOO?
> That would not only be of practical benefit to users, but would also enhance the reputation of AOO, as in the practice oriented project.
>
> Why the latter is important?
> I think because of the positive reputation of AOO in public grow the number of our supporters (sponsors, supporters, developers) will be.
>
> My view:
> We should not emulate LibreOffice because LibreOffice may be innovative, but public statements about quality and consistency of LibreOffice are devastating.
> For example, the chairman of the FroDeV spoke (a German association for the promotion of free software) this publicly recently plain text, see:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
> (Sorry only in German)
>
>
>
> My questions are:
>
> Are there any agreements which result to have the number of votes for an issue? Is there some agreement that a high number of votes to be reason, the implementation of Issues to be considered as a priority?
>
> What is your basic view on this?
>
>
> Greetings
> Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>
>> You must be talking about this one:
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120463
>> Of course this bug has zero vote. It's a huge regression
>
>
> Actually, the one to follow (fixed) is
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121625
> and my issue you specify above was just an idea to provide a built-in
> mechanism to reset the user profile so that we could avoid complex
> instructions for users.
>
>
>> I don't expect users to vote for a feature that is so basic: an
>> upgrade should not lead to unusable software.
>
>
> In general, vote are indicators. But historically users have tended to use
> their votes to prioritize features/enhancements rather than bugfixes. So it
> shouldn't be surprising that a bugfix that affects many people does not have
> many votes.
>
OK. But we still have the same problem. The results are biased
because it is a vote that has been held for a decade. So issues that
were entered in 2002 have been voted on longer than those entered in
2012. So regardless of its intrinsic value or popularity, an issue
that has been voted on for a longer period of time will tend to have
more votes. This makes the results far more difficult to interpret
than if we voted on them at the same time. Even with the Google
Moderator votes we saw that effect, even though that was only over a
period of a month. The ideas that were entered on the first days had
more votes because they had greater opportunity for votes.
So if we really want an accurate view of user preferences, we would
need to do something like a survey.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Hagar Delest wrote:
> You must be talking about this one:
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120463
> Of course this bug has zero vote. It's a huge regression
Actually, the one to follow (fixed) is
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121625
and my issue you specify above was just an idea to provide a built-in
mechanism to reset the user profile so that we could avoid complex
instructions for users.
> I don't expect users to vote for a feature that is so basic: an
> upgrade should not lead to unusable software.
In general, vote are indicators. But historically users have tended to
use their votes to prioritize features/enhancements rather than
bugfixes. So it shouldn't be surprising that a bugfix that affects many
people does not have many votes.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 14/03/2013 12:41, Rob Weir a écrit :
> I'm not sure votes from 2002 are the most accurate way of determining
> what users want. For example, I think we'd agree that the
> most-critical issue in 3.4.1 is the profile-related crash. But the
> Bugzilla issue for this has received *zero* votes:
>
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
I forgot about that one too.
I guess that the link above is wrong (used in a latter section of your mail).
You must be talking about this one: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120463
Of course this bug has zero vote. It's a huge regression that should be fixed ASAP because it completely ruins the user experience. I think that I had already raised the user profile issue in the past a long time ago. I had to raise it again until someone really had a look and found the culprit. I don't expect users to vote for a feature that is so basic: an upgrade should not lead to unusable software.
Another example is this one: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=107847
We have had new reports recently about this data loss (files turned to hashes ###).
In this post: http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17677#p81363
I've listed 131 topics about this problem in the forum. Hardly any vote however since the report has been bullshitted. But the bug is still here sadly. Even if it's difficult to spot it, at least the save process should be secured.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Larry Gusaas <la...@gmail.com>.
On 2013-03-17 8:32 AM Rob Weir wrote:
> I'm sorry that the troglodytes don't like that.
That is a very insulting comment. Why do you have to make derogatory comments to people who
disagree with your opinion? Where did you get you Masters in alienating people?
--
_________________________________
Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
> Any attempt to reset the votes would mean that once more, high scores are
> just ignored.
> Of course, nobody would browse the whole list of existing bugs, even to
> recast their own votes. So reseting the votes would only lead to forget
> about old bugs or old RFE.
If they are easily forgotten then they are probably not very
important. Or maybe they were once important but are not any more.
> Have office suites really evolved so that most wanted features several years
> ago are now not relevant at all? If so, why not take the top 20 and have a
> vote on the dev list for each of them and keep them or close them for the
> rationale that could emerge from the discussion?
>
It costs us nothing to keep feature requests open forever. Database
storage in Bugzilla is the same either way. Of course, the more
useless old ones we keep open the harder it is to see what is truly
important. So there is a cognitive cost to keeping them around.
> My feeling is that you're trying to change the AOO agenda about RFE. Just
> ditch current history to rewrite your own history with OpenOffice. Same with
> your other message in my other mail in this topic. Of course old reports got
> more votes. If they had been closed earlier, the list of active reports
> would be different. And since RFE cannot implemented shortly, you'll always
> have this time bias.
>
Actually, I recently did a report on the open issues with the most
votes and posted it to the list. So rather than questioning my
motives you might note that this is more to support the voting process
than you or anyone else in this project has done:
http://markmail.org/message/b3t2j4ip4lkc227t
And remember, this thread was about an issue open since 2002. So by
definition it has been ignored for over a decade. My suggesting that
the issue might not be relevant is not a change at all. It is merely
acknowledging reality. I may be alone in that, of course.
-Rob
> Anyway, I don't want to engage further in this discussion. I've given my
> opinion, if the developers agree with your proposal then so be it. But if
> the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users decisions
> and won't hesitate to point to this topic in the forum to explain why I've
> lost the least interest in BZ. I would not see the point filing reports if
> in the future someone can delete the votes for whatever reason.
> If you want to go even further, why not just delete all the content of BZ
> and start from scratch?
>
> Hagar
>
>
> Le 17/03/2013 15:32, Rob Weir a écrit :
>
>
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>>
>>>> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
>>>> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
>>>> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
>>>> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
>>>> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
>>>> that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Argh, no!
>>> The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very detailed,
>>> not
>>> that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the
>>> problem.
>>
>>
>> Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is
>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>
>>> Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator.
>>> Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression of
>>> a
>>> large install base.
>>>
>>
>> They are less valid because they are ancient and do not necessarily
>> reflect what today's users want.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
>>>> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
>>>> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
>>>> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
>>>> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
>>>> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should restart
>>> from
>>> scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback?
>>
>>
>> Yes. That is an accurate statement of my belief here. Feedback from
>> 2002 issues, no matter how many ancient votes were attached, is
>> meaningless in 2013.
>>
>> Note: if you are correct, that these votes are still relevant, then
>> new votes would quickly yield the same distribution and the same
>> issues would quickly end up with the same prioritization. And if I am
>> correct we would get a different distribution. But you must admit
>> that if we did reset that votes and a different distributed emerged,
>> then the new distribution would be the more accurate and more relevant
>> one. So I don't see what you are afraid of. Why not get the most
>> accurate feedback possible?
>>
>>> If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself what
>>> is
>>> lacking (manpower / expertise / ...).
>>> What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I
>>> guess,
>>> so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users.
>>>
>>
>> Read what I wrote. I suggested that we "remind users about voting
>> via a blog post." I never said anything about collecting feedback via
>> blog post comments. The idea would be to have a blog post that
>> explains how voting works and inviting users to vote in BZ. In other
>> words, making it so votes are not only filtered through forum
>> volunteers and their recommendations. Open it up.
>>
>>> In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and vote
>>> for
>>> the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always
>>> been said that the only interface between devs and users should be the
>>> BZ.
>>> And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this is
>>> the
>>> best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and this is
>>> not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants to
>>> make
>>> their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and it
>>> means
>>> that it is not a really important idea.
>>> How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly?
>>>
>>
>> You misunderstand. We should still use BZ to collect feedback on BZ
>> issues. My suggestions were aimed at making this feedback more
>> relevant, so it is not just project insiders voting, but getting a
>> greater representation of what users want. We have had over 40
>> million downloads. How many of these users having voted? How many
>> even know they can vote. You asked why the votes are ignored. I'm
>> suggesting that if the feedback is ancient and unrepresentative, that
>> could be one reason.
>>
>>> Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any
>>> attention.
>>> Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their
>>> priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would
>>> personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing
>>> reports,
>>> voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all.
>>>
>>
>> I'm telling you why I think the ancient votes are ignored. That's my
>> belief. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But I think we
>> agree that the votes are ignored today.
>>
>>> If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes, then
>>> we
>>> have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the
>>> latter
>>> are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden.
>>>
>>> Hagar
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischmidt@gmail.com]
> This would be a very interesting approach that of course is indeed not
> completely new. If we wouldn't have useful patches in BZ I personally
> would of course support such an approach. Having a clean and fresh BZ
> would be an opportunity to focus the real problems we have and find a
> good balance between feature development and bugfixing.
>
> But of course it's not really realistic :-(
>
> The main problem with votes at the moment is that we don't
> have a common
> understanding how to handle issue with votes. I would say at
> the moment
> these votes are useless. We had focused on issue with high
> votes in the
> past because it was the goal for developers at this time, managers
> pushed it but later on the priorities changed again and nobody really
> took care of these issues.
>
> If we want to make use of this BZ feature we should first
> think what we
> want to do with this issues and can we do it. Means we can't force
> developers to work on such high voted issues, we can only motivate to
> focus on these issues first. Or if some sponsors are interested to pay
> developers to work on such issues that could also work, I don't know.
There are certainly technical problems or problems of coordination, but what we
need, first and foremost, is the insight that we need to talk with users so that
they understand us.
Let me be clear:
our internal problems are users not care, they want a working software.
Where users give us Feadback, (for example write issues) they want something in
return for it, that we look seriously at their Feadback.
If our response should be to this user that we can not help them, because we do
not agree on how to deal with issues or votes, then that is unfortunately
insufficient.
This is not an accusation but only the truth, and we should do everything to
overcome these problems quickly.
> In general I think we should continue the discussion about
> our long term
> goals for the project and the product first. We can't do
> everything and
> it is important that we at least have all some common understanding
> about our strategy.
>
> We can start with thinking what office productivity suite really means
> and if we already fulfill these requirements...
Good, then I will begin by saying:
the interests of our users should be our most important goal. The minimum of this
is we listen to their problems and take it seriously.
AOO is not software experts, but for normal users and normal users want normal
responses.
Please let us understand together, that this is an important difference to the
Apache Web server (for example), as this is a software mainly for experts, AOO,
but for normal users.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/17/13 10:13 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> Any attempt to reset the votes would mean that once more, high scores
> are just ignored.
> Of course, nobody would browse the whole list of existing bugs, even to
> recast their own votes. So reseting the votes would only lead to forget
> about old bugs or old RFE.
> Have office suites really evolved so that most wanted features several
> years ago are now not relevant at all? If so, why not take the top 20
> and have a vote on the dev list for each of them and keep them or close
> them for the rationale that could emerge from the discussion?
>
> My feeling is that you're trying to change the AOO agenda about RFE.
> Just ditch current history to rewrite your own history with OpenOffice.
> Same with your other message in my other mail in this topic. Of course
> old reports got more votes. If they had been closed earlier, the list of
> active reports would be different. And since RFE cannot implemented
> shortly, you'll always have this time bias.
>
> Anyway, I don't want to engage further in this discussion. I've given my
> opinion, if the developers agree with your proposal then so be it. But
> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
> decisions and won't hesitate to point to this topic in the forum to
> explain why I've lost the least interest in BZ. I would not see the
> point filing reports if in the future someone can delete the votes for
> whatever reason.
> If you want to go even further, why not just delete all the content of
> BZ and start from scratch?
This would be a very interesting approach that of course is indeed not
completely new. If we wouldn't have useful patches in BZ I personally
would of course support such an approach. Having a clean and fresh BZ
would be an opportunity to focus the real problems we have and find a
good balance between feature development and bugfixing.
But of course it's not really realistic :-(
The main problem with votes at the moment is that we don't have a common
understanding how to handle issue with votes. I would say at the moment
these votes are useless. We had focused on issue with high votes in the
past because it was the goal for developers at this time, managers
pushed it but later on the priorities changed again and nobody really
took care of these issues.
If we want to make use of this BZ feature we should first think what we
want to do with this issues and can we do it. Means we can't force
developers to work on such high voted issues, we can only motivate to
focus on these issues first. Or if some sponsors are interested to pay
developers to work on such issues that could also work, I don't know.
In general I think we should continue the discussion about our long term
goals for the project and the product first. We can't do everything and
it is important that we at least have all some common understanding
about our strategy.
We can start with thinking what office productivity suite really means
and if we already fulfill these requirements...
Juergen
>
> Hagar
>
>
> Le 17/03/2013 15:32, Rob Weir a écrit :
>
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Hagar Delest
>> <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
>>> Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>>
>>>> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
>>>> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
>>>> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
>>>> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
>>>> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
>>>> that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
>>>
>>>
>>> Argh, no!
>>> The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very
>>> detailed, not
>>> that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the
>>> problem.
>>
>> Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is
>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>
>>> Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator.
>>> Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression
>>> of a
>>> large install base.
>>>
>>
>> They are less valid because they are ancient and do not necessarily
>> reflect what today's users want.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
>>>> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
>>>> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
>>>> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
>>>> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
>>>> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
>>>
>>>
>>> What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should
>>> restart from
>>> scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback?
>>
>> Yes. That is an accurate statement of my belief here. Feedback from
>> 2002 issues, no matter how many ancient votes were attached, is
>> meaningless in 2013.
>>
>> Note: if you are correct, that these votes are still relevant, then
>> new votes would quickly yield the same distribution and the same
>> issues would quickly end up with the same prioritization. And if I am
>> correct we would get a different distribution. But you must admit
>> that if we did reset that votes and a different distributed emerged,
>> then the new distribution would be the more accurate and more relevant
>> one. So I don't see what you are afraid of. Why not get the most
>> accurate feedback possible?
>>
>>> If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself
>>> what is
>>> lacking (manpower / expertise / ...).
>>> What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I
>>> guess,
>>> so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users.
>>>
>>
>> Read what I wrote. I suggested that we "remind users about voting
>> via a blog post." I never said anything about collecting feedback via
>> blog post comments. The idea would be to have a blog post that
>> explains how voting works and inviting users to vote in BZ. In other
>> words, making it so votes are not only filtered through forum
>> volunteers and their recommendations. Open it up.
>>
>>> In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and
>>> vote for
>>> the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always
>>> been said that the only interface between devs and users should be
>>> the BZ.
>>> And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this
>>> is the
>>> best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and
>>> this is
>>> not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants
>>> to make
>>> their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and
>>> it means
>>> that it is not a really important idea.
>>> How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly?
>>>
>>
>> You misunderstand. We should still use BZ to collect feedback on BZ
>> issues. My suggestions were aimed at making this feedback more
>> relevant, so it is not just project insiders voting, but getting a
>> greater representation of what users want. We have had over 40
>> million downloads. How many of these users having voted? How many
>> even know they can vote. You asked why the votes are ignored. I'm
>> suggesting that if the feedback is ancient and unrepresentative, that
>> could be one reason.
>>
>>> Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any
>>> attention.
>>> Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their
>>> priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would
>>> personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing
>>> reports,
>>> voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all.
>>>
>>
>> I'm telling you why I think the ancient votes are ignored. That's my
>> belief. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But I think we
>> agree that the votes are ignored today.
>>
>>> If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes,
>>> then we
>>> have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the
>>> latter
>>> are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden.
>>>
>>> Hagar
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
FWLIW, passive users of Apache projects generally expect
and get very little direct say in what features
get actively developed and put back into the project.
OTOH, people who actively contribute, by either supplying
patches, or filing quality and timely bug reports with
enough details for some developer to easily resolve the
issue for them, do enjoy some say in the overall direction
of the feature sets. OTOH, simply counting votes on issues
is not one of the considerations that goes into this sort
of mindset most Apache projects have.
HTH
>________________________________
> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:25 AM
>Subject: Re: A question about existing practices
>
>On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Keith N. McKenna
><ke...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>>>>> decisions
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
>>>> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily
>>>> true
>>>> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer.
>>>> But
>>>> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as
>>>> we
>>>> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
>>> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
>>> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
>>> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
>>> what % of those issues have received votes.
>>>
>>> Year %Votes
>>> 2002 45%
>>> 2003 39%
>>> 2004 34%
>>> 2005 31%
>>> 2006 30%
>>> 2007 24%
>>> 2008 23%
>>> 2009 23%
>>> 2010 14%
>>> 2011 5%
>>> 2012 6%
>>> 2013 2%
>>>
>>> I see a trend here, a very strong one. Plot it and you see a nearly
>>> linear trend (r = - 0.98). Older issues have received more votes
>>> than new issuers.
>>>
>>> There could be several reasons for this:
>>>
>>> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
>>> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
>>> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>>>
>>> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
>>> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
>>> linear trend.
>>>
>>> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
>>> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
>>> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
>>> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
>>> received votes?
>>>
>> Or it could be that people just got frustrated over time that nothing ever
>> happened and stopped voting or moved on to other applications that better
>> met there needs.
>> The bottom line is that we do not know why it happened and trying to make
>> decisions based on it does not make sense.
>>
>
>Oh, but I don't need to explain why this has happened. I only need to
>note that it did happen to question whether the older vote counts are
>an accurate reflection of user preferences today.
>
>-Rob
>
>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
>>> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>
>>>>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>>>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
>>>> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find
>>>> offensive
>>>> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
>>>> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes
>>>> are
>>>> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>>>>
>>>> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted
>>>> issues,
>>>> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted
>>>> issues
>>>> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who
>>>> want
>>>> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andrea.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Keith N. McKenna
<ke...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>>>> decisions
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
>>> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily
>>> true
>>> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer.
>>> But
>>> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as
>>> we
>>> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>>>
>>
>> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
>> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
>> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
>> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
>> what % of those issues have received votes.
>>
>> Year %Votes
>> 2002 45%
>> 2003 39%
>> 2004 34%
>> 2005 31%
>> 2006 30%
>> 2007 24%
>> 2008 23%
>> 2009 23%
>> 2010 14%
>> 2011 5%
>> 2012 6%
>> 2013 2%
>>
>> I see a trend here, a very strong one. Plot it and you see a nearly
>> linear trend (r = - 0.98). Older issues have received more votes
>> than new issuers.
>>
>> There could be several reasons for this:
>>
>> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
>> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
>> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>>
>> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
>> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
>> linear trend.
>>
>> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
>> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
>> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
>> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
>> received votes?
>>
> Or it could be that people just got frustrated over time that nothing ever
> happened and stopped voting or moved on to other applications that better
> met there needs.
> The bottom line is that we do not know why it happened and trying to make
> decisions based on it does not make sense.
>
Oh, but I don't need to explain why this has happened. I only need to
note that it did happen to question whether the older vote counts are
an accurate reflection of user preferences today.
-Rob
> Regards
> Keith
>
>
>> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
>> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
>> issues.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
>>> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find
>>> offensive
>>> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
>>> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes
>>> are
>>> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>>>
>>> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted
>>> issues,
>>> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted
>>> issues
>>> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who
>>> want
>>> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrea.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>
>>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>>> decisions
>>
>>
>> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
>> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily true
>> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer. But
>> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as we
>> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>>
>
> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
> what % of those issues have received votes.
>
> Year %Votes
> 2002 45%
> 2003 39%
> 2004 34%
> 2005 31%
> 2006 30%
> 2007 24%
> 2008 23%
> 2009 23%
> 2010 14%
> 2011 5%
> 2012 6%
> 2013 2%
>
> I see a trend here, a very strong one. Plot it and you see a nearly
> linear trend (r = - 0.98). Older issues have received more votes
> than new issuers.
>
> There could be several reasons for this:
>
> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>
> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
> linear trend.
>
> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
> received votes?
>
Or it could be that people just got frustrated over time that nothing
ever happened and stopped voting or moved on to other applications that
better met there needs.
The bottom line is that we do not know why it happened and trying to
make decisions based on it does not make sense.
Regards
Keith
> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
> issues.
>
> -Rob
>
>>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>
>>
>> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
>> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find offensive
>> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
>> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes are
>> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>>
>> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted issues,
>> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted issues
>> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who want
>> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> Now, if we had a way to get the detailed counts on issues, and do this
> over time, then we could find a way of highlighting "trending issues",
> e.g., those that have recently been getting more votes, or more
> comments. (The number of users who have commented on the issue is
> perhaps more interesting than the number of votes). That might be a
> way of focusing in on what users think is important *today* without
> resetting vote counts.
Bugzilla apparently has the capacity to sort on votes, per this report
on their sample site:
https://landfill.bugzilla.org/bugzilla-4.2-branch/report.cgi?x_axis_field=&y_axis_field=votes&z_axis_field=&query_format=report-table&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&resolution=---&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&longdesc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_id=&bug_id_type=anyexact&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailqa_contact2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&emaillongdesc3=1&emailtype3=substring&email3=&chfieldvalue=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&j_top=AND&f1=noop&o1=noop&v1=&format=table&action=wrap
Also in that sample site I was able to do a search, then use "Change
Columns" at the bottom of the page and add "Votes" as an output
column. So maybe this project's Bugzilla isn't configured
correctly...?
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there a way to list bugs in order by the number of votes they've
>>> received? I couldn't find "votes" in the axis fields under tabular
>>> reports.
>>>
>>
>> You can use the vote count when defining a search criterion. But I
>> have not seen a way to put the vote count into a column for display in
>> the search results.
>>
>> -Rob
>
> Kinda limits the usefulness of votes, doesn't it, if you can't even
> find out what the most voted for issue is? I mean, if you could
> easily see that issue X has the most votes, you could bring up X on
> the ML and at least decide immediately whether or not it would be
> worked on. As it is, votes aren't helpful because they're not
> visible.
>
Bugzilla has a REST API as well, so it is possible to get a vote count
in an automated way. But it appears to really slam the server, so
I've been avoiding this.
> Getting laborious myself, I did some URL hacking and got counts of
> issues with certain minimal numbers of votes. Around 42 I got bored
> and started jumping ahead...see the list at the end.
>
> I did a table report sorting on severity. Blockers dropped off at two
> votes. Criticals dropped off at 4. Majors lasted to 70. The big
> winner is https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=93613 with 378
> votes, and that issue's severity was listed as trivial. (Modified most
> recently in January, by Rob.)
>
Interesting. It looks like you included all issue types, including
DEFECT, ENHANCEMENT and FEATURE? I think it was suggested earlier
that users tend not to vote on bugs. I don't know if that is true,
but in my counts I ignored DEFECT issue types.
> Perhaps a periodic report of this sort would make votes more relevant?
>
If we only highlight top vote issues from 2002, we're just reinforcing
more of the same. Think of it this way: who is going to make a
serious effort to express a preference on an idea in 2013 if the deck
is clearly stacked from ongoing votes from a decade ago on some other
issue? I think users will see that their vote has no meaning in a
situation like that.
Now, if we had a way to get the detailed counts on issues, and do this
over time, then we could find a way of highlighting "trending issues",
e.g., those that have recently been getting more votes, or more
comments. (The number of users who have commented on the issue is
perhaps more interesting than the number of votes). That might be a
way of focusing in on what users think is important *today* without
resetting vote counts.
-Rob
> Don
>
> 0 - 26738
> 1 - 4992
> 2 - 3647
> 3 - 1965
> 4 - 1555
> 5 - 1162
> 6 - 970
> 7 - 813
> 8 - 712
> 9 - 632
> 10 - 568
> 11 - 522
> 12 - 469
> 13 - 423
> 14 - 384
> 15 - 360
> 16 - 327
> 17 - 303
> 18 - 278
> 19 - 270
> 20 - 260
> 21 - 244
> 22 - 230
> 23 - 212
> 24 - 199
> 25 - 194
> 26 - 186
> 27 - 178
> 28 - 174
> 29 - 166
> 30 - 159
> 31 - 148
> 32 - 145
> 33 - 138
> 34 - 134
> 35 - 128
> 36 - 123
> 37 - 119
> 38 - 114
> 39 - 109
> 40 - 104
> 41 - 101
> 42 - 99
>
> 50 - 81
> 60 - 63
> 70 - 49
> 80 - 39
> 90 - 33
> 100 - 29
>
> 150 - 15
> 200 - 11
>
> 300 - 2
> 378 - 1
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is there a way to list bugs in order by the number of votes they've
>> received? I couldn't find "votes" in the axis fields under tabular
>> reports.
>>
>
> You can use the vote count when defining a search criterion. But I
> have not seen a way to put the vote count into a column for display in
> the search results.
>
> -Rob
Kinda limits the usefulness of votes, doesn't it, if you can't even
find out what the most voted for issue is? I mean, if you could
easily see that issue X has the most votes, you could bring up X on
the ML and at least decide immediately whether or not it would be
worked on. As it is, votes aren't helpful because they're not
visible.
Getting laborious myself, I did some URL hacking and got counts of
issues with certain minimal numbers of votes. Around 42 I got bored
and started jumping ahead...see the list at the end.
I did a table report sorting on severity. Blockers dropped off at two
votes. Criticals dropped off at 4. Majors lasted to 70. The big
winner is https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=93613 with 378
votes, and that issue's severity was listed as trivial. (Modified most
recently in January, by Rob.)
Perhaps a periodic report of this sort would make votes more relevant?
Don
0 - 26738
1 - 4992
2 - 3647
3 - 1965
4 - 1555
5 - 1162
6 - 970
7 - 813
8 - 712
9 - 632
10 - 568
11 - 522
12 - 469
13 - 423
14 - 384
15 - 360
16 - 327
17 - 303
18 - 278
19 - 270
20 - 260
21 - 244
22 - 230
23 - 212
24 - 199
25 - 194
26 - 186
27 - 178
28 - 174
29 - 166
30 - 159
31 - 148
32 - 145
33 - 138
34 - 134
35 - 128
36 - 123
37 - 119
38 - 114
39 - 109
40 - 104
41 - 101
42 - 99
50 - 81
60 - 63
70 - 49
80 - 39
90 - 33
100 - 29
150 - 15
200 - 11
300 - 2
378 - 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
>> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
>> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
>> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
>> what % of those issues have received votes.
>>
>> Year %Votes
>> 2002 45%
>> 2003 39%
>> 2004 34%
>> 2005 31%
>> 2006 30%
>> 2007 24%
>> 2008 23%
>> 2009 23%
>> 2010 14%
>> 2011 5%
>> 2012 6%
>> 2013 2%
>
> Is there a way to list bugs in order by the number of votes they've
> received? I couldn't find "votes" in the axis fields under tabular
> reports.
>
You can use the vote count when defining a search criterion. But I
have not seen a way to put the vote count into a column for display in
the search results.
-Rob
> Don
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
> what % of those issues have received votes.
>
> Year %Votes
> 2002 45%
> 2003 39%
> 2004 34%
> 2005 31%
> 2006 30%
> 2007 24%
> 2008 23%
> 2009 23%
> 2010 14%
> 2011 5%
> 2012 6%
> 2013 2%
Is there a way to list bugs in order by the number of votes they've
received? I couldn't find "votes" in the axis fields under tabular
reports.
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Alexandro Colorado <jz...@oooes.org>.
On 3/20/13, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>
>>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>>> decisions
>>
>>
>> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
>> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily
>> true
>> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer.
>> But
>> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as
>> we
>> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>>
>
> I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
> I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
> yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
> least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
> what % of those issues have received votes.
>
> Year %Votes
> 2002 45%
> 2003 39%
> 2004 34%
> 2005 31%
> 2006 30%
> 2007 24%
> 2008 23%
> 2009 23%
> 2010 14%
> 2011 5%
> 2012 6%
> 2013 2%
>
> I see a trend here, a very strong one. Plot it and you see a nearly
> linear trend (r = - 0.98). Older issues have received more votes
> than new issuers.
>
> There could be several reasons for this:
>
> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>
> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
> linear trend.
+1
>
> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
> received votes?
>
> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
> issues.
>
> -Rob
>
>>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>>
>>
>> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
>> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find
>> offensive
>> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
>> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes
>> are
>> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>>
>> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted
>> issues,
>> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted
>> issues
>> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who
>> want
>> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
--
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
http://es.openoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>
>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>> decisions
>
>
> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily true
> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer. But
> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as we
> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>
I was curious to check my intuition on this. So with a bit of effort
I was able to get the following data out of Bugzilla, showing the
yearly percentage of enhancement or feature issue types have had at
least one vote. So it is showing for issues entered in that year,
what % of those issues have received votes.
Year %Votes
2002 45%
2003 39%
2004 34%
2005 31%
2006 30%
2007 24%
2008 23%
2009 23%
2010 14%
2011 5%
2012 6%
2013 2%
I see a trend here, a very strong one. Plot it and you see a nearly
linear trend (r = - 0.98). Older issues have received more votes
than new issuers.
There could be several reasons for this:
1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
less smart in such a regular way over the years?
2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
linear trend.
3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
received votes?
In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
issues.
-Rob
>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>> is
>>>
>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>
>
> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find offensive
> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes are
> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>
> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted issues,
> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted issues
> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who want
> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sorry, I don't mean to say you did anything wrong. Not at all. But I
> do believe that there are only a small number real obligations for
> what kinds of issues we absolutely must address in the code:
>
> 1) We must respond to security vulnerabilities, if any are found
>
> 2) We must respond to any legal or licensing issues in the code, if
> any are found
>
> If we fail on the above, then the responsible thing would be for the
> ASF to shut us down, right?
Yes, right.
> Votes are one source of user preferences, but not the only and not
> necessarily the best.
Exactly.
But in a modern world is listening to user votes not only what they demand, but also to get into conversations with users.
Users are not experts in software, they need our advice, but users also _need to feel their problems taken seriously_. Sometimes the feeling is to be taken seriously, even more important than technical changes.
In a modern world, we must understand that we have to sell AOO, not in terms of money, but in the sense of promoting our product.
Most users just want a good software and we have to convince them that this is AOO. To do AOO be technically good, but our communication with users must also be good.
For me there is not a specific problem with a specific issue, but I wanted to ask all of us to _respect_ only _with care_ to meet the needs of our users.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>
>> Developers work on what they want to work on. This is not a problem.
>> Most developers on the project today have their own list of items they
>> want to work on. That is fine. Maybe we get developers who don't
>> have a preference and would be happy to look at 10 year old feature
>> requests instead? That would be nice, of course. But then again, if
>> it hasn't happened in a decade then I wonder what makes it happen now?
>
> You repeated here things that we all know and respect.
>
> But, we here at AOO also a community, and each of us doing the work he can do best, or would like to make it.
>
> But what should be anything wrong if I (I started the thread here) remind us all of the AOO only a good product will work if all aspects AND mutually share experience or if some of us ask others to help?
>
Sorry, I don't mean to say you did anything wrong. Not at all. But I
do believe that there are only a small number real obligations for
what kinds of issues we absolutely must address in the code:
1) We must respond to security vulnerabilities, if any are found
2) We must respond to any legal or licensing issues in the code, if
any are found
If we fail on the above, then the responsible thing would be for the
ASF to shut us down, right?
But beyond that there are no absolutes. Sure, being responsive to
users is important. We do that in many ways. There are tradeoffs.
All of our time necessarily adds up to 100%. How much focus we put on
adding features versus adding platforms versus fixing bugs, etc., will
be determined by many factors, and guided by many sources of
information.
Votes are one source of user preferences, but not the only and not
necessarily the best. For example, Windows 64-bit support would be
wonderful, though I don't think there were many votes for this from
2002, right? With 40 million downloads, it is important to take a
broad view of things, and not be too worried about the opinions of 300
votes from a decade ago. We need to put it all in perspective.
-Rob
> It was not my goal of developers to demand anything, it was just my goal to point out that there are certain problems that can solve only certain people effectively.
>
>
> *Maybe there are also problems that may help here (eg in Germany in public relations or in the care of AOO-users in public administration or business), then I will gladly do.*
>
> *Questions for the bug-fixing but I need the help of the developers and their understanding that sometimes bugfixing, more important for our mutual success as more new features.*
>
> *That was my message, my request, nothing else.*
>
>
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Developers work on what they want to work on. This is not a problem.
> Most developers on the project today have their own list of items they
> want to work on. That is fine. Maybe we get developers who don't
> have a preference and would be happy to look at 10 year old feature
> requests instead? That would be nice, of course. But then again, if
> it hasn't happened in a decade then I wonder what makes it happen now?
You repeated here things that we all know and respect.
But, we here at AOO also a community, and each of us doing the work he can do best, or would like to make it.
But what should be anything wrong if I (I started the thread here) remind us all of the AOO only a good product will work if all aspects AND mutually share experience or if some of us ask others to help?
It was not my goal of developers to demand anything, it was just my goal to point out that there are certain problems that can solve only certain people effectively.
*Maybe there are also problems that may help here (eg in Germany in public relations or in the care of AOO-users in public administration or business), then I will gladly do.*
*Questions for the bug-fixing but I need the help of the developers and their understanding that sometimes bugfixing, more important for our mutual success as more new features.*
*That was my message, my request, nothing else.*
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hagar Delest wrote:
>>
>> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
>> decisions
>
>
> Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
> user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily true
> that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for longer. But
Since the number of registered users in Bugzilla increases over time,
the older issues have had greater opportunity to accumulate votes.
> it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to vote as much as we
> used to: many new users are likely unaware that they can vote.
>
>>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That
>>> is
>>>
>>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>>> troglodytes don't like that.
>
>
> Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as their
> opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find offensive
> to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a couple of
> occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was done, votes are
> scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
>
Developers work on what they want to work on. This is not a problem.
Most developers on the project today have their own list of items they
want to work on. That is fine. Maybe we get developers who don't
have a preference and would be happy to look at 10 year old feature
requests instead? That would be nice, of course. But then again, if
it hasn't happened in a decade then I wonder what makes it happen now?
> There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted issues,
> but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most voted issues
> (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues people who want
> to help with development or sponsor it), things would improve.
>
Posting the list can't hurt. Of course, I did that once and unless it
escaped my notice it had zero effect.
Regards,
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Joost Andrae <Jo...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> maybe it has other reasons like missing access to the former OOo login on
> the Apache infrastructure eg. one thing that went wrong with my OOo account.
>
But that doesn't explain the steady decline from 2002 to 2010, for example.
But whatever the reason, I think it demonstrates that vote counts from
the earlier years are extremely difficult to compare fairly with
recent vote counts. And the fact that we don't even have a formal RFE
for iOS or Android, even though we get daily requests for this via
other means is odd too. It suggests that *how* users give feedback
has changed. Maybe in 2002 it was via Bugzilla. But today we get
more feedback from Facebook and Twitter than we do Bugzilla. IMHO we
need to adapt to how users actually express preferences today rather
than assume that they are in tune with a Bugzilla based feedback
mechanism from 2002.
-Rob
>
>> There could be several reasons for this:
>>
>> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
>> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
>> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>>
>> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
>> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
>> linear trend.
>>
>> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
>> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
>> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
>> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
>> received votes?
>>
>> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
>> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
>> issues.
>
>
> Kind regards, Joost
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Joost Andrae <Jo...@gmx.de>.
Hi Rob,
> But whatever the reason, I think it demonstrates that vote counts from
> the earlier years are extremely difficult to compare fairly with
> recent vote counts. And the fact that we don't even have a formal RFE
> for iOS or Android, even though we get daily requests for this via
> other means is odd too. It suggests that *how* users give feedback
> has changed. Maybe in 2002 it was via Bugzilla. But today we get
> more feedback from Facebook and Twitter than we do Bugzilla. IMHO we
> need to adapt to how users actually express preferences today rather
> than assume that they are in tune with a Bugzilla based feedback
> mechanism from 2002.
>
AOO is an open source project and features don't get implemented by
votes. If someone want's an iOS or Android port then someone has to do
it. Perhaps a professional committer like IBM may want to help here. I
don't know if there's a demand within IBM to fund such a work...
Kind regards, Joost
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Joost Andrae <Jo...@gmx.de>.
Hi Rob,
maybe it has other reasons like missing access to the former OOo login
on the Apache infrastructure eg. one thing that went wrong with my OOo
account.
> There could be several reasons for this:
>
> 1) Older issues are better issues because they were entered by smarter
> people. But then the linear trend is then odd. Did people become
> less smart in such a regular way over the years?
>
> 2) Older issues have been around longer so they have had a longer
> opportunity to be voted on. This very naturally would explain a
> linear trend.
>
> 3) Users have become less interested in or aware of voting. But
> again, it hard to explain the gradual linear trend. Why for example,
> would users in 2010 entering an issue not even vote for their own
> issue 90% of the time, but in 2002 nearly half of those issues
> received votes?
>
> In any case, this is one reason why I take the old vote counts cum
> grano salis. For whatever reason the votes are biased toward older
> issues.
Kind regards, Joost
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Hagar Delest wrote:
> if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users
> decisions
Resetting votes does not make sense. There is a limit on how many bugs a
user can vote for and votes can be reallocated, so it isn't necessarily
true that an old bug has more votes just because it's been around for
longer. But it's true that we are not advertising the possibility to
vote as much as we used to: many new users are likely unaware that they
can vote.
>> [Rob] Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is
>> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
>> troglodytes don't like that.
Not only troglodytes. Many users interpret the votes in Bugzilla as
their opportunity to influence the OpenOffice decisions (and would find
offensive to be assimilated to troglodytes). Honestly, except for a
couple of occasions years ago when a review of "most voted issues" was
done, votes are scarcely taken into consideration. This is the problem.
There is room for improvement here: you once posted the most voted
issues, but if we made it regularly and we committed to fixing the most
voted issues (or, more realistically, to direct to the most voted issues
people who want to help with development or sponsor it), things would
improve.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Any attempt to reset the votes would mean that once more, high scores are just ignored.
Of course, nobody would browse the whole list of existing bugs, even to recast their own votes. So reseting the votes would only lead to forget about old bugs or old RFE.
Have office suites really evolved so that most wanted features several years ago are now not relevant at all? If so, why not take the top 20 and have a vote on the dev list for each of them and keep them or close them for the rationale that could emerge from the discussion?
My feeling is that you're trying to change the AOO agenda about RFE. Just ditch current history to rewrite your own history with OpenOffice. Same with your other message in my other mail in this topic. Of course old reports got more votes. If they had been closed earlier, the list of active reports would be different. And since RFE cannot implemented shortly, you'll always have this time bias.
Anyway, I don't want to engage further in this discussion. I've given my opinion, if the developers agree with your proposal then so be it. But if the votes are reset, I'll take it as a huge setback for the users decisions and won't hesitate to point to this topic in the forum to explain why I've lost the least interest in BZ. I would not see the point filing reports if in the future someone can delete the votes for whatever reason.
If you want to go even further, why not just delete all the content of BZ and start from scratch?
Hagar
Le 17/03/2013 15:32, Rob Weir a écrit :
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
>> Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>
>>> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
>>> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
>>> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
>>> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
>>> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
>>> that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
>>
>>
>> Argh, no!
>> The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very detailed, not
>> that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the
>> problem.
>
> Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is
> why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
> troglodytes don't like that.
>
>> Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator.
>> Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression of a
>> large install base.
>>
>
> They are less valid because they are ancient and do not necessarily
> reflect what today's users want.
>
>>
>>
>>> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
>>> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
>>> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
>>> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
>>> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
>>> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
>>
>>
>> What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should restart from
>> scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback?
>
> Yes. That is an accurate statement of my belief here. Feedback from
> 2002 issues, no matter how many ancient votes were attached, is
> meaningless in 2013.
>
> Note: if you are correct, that these votes are still relevant, then
> new votes would quickly yield the same distribution and the same
> issues would quickly end up with the same prioritization. And if I am
> correct we would get a different distribution. But you must admit
> that if we did reset that votes and a different distributed emerged,
> then the new distribution would be the more accurate and more relevant
> one. So I don't see what you are afraid of. Why not get the most
> accurate feedback possible?
>
>> If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself what is
>> lacking (manpower / expertise / ...).
>> What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I guess,
>> so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users.
>>
>
> Read what I wrote. I suggested that we "remind users about voting
> via a blog post." I never said anything about collecting feedback via
> blog post comments. The idea would be to have a blog post that
> explains how voting works and inviting users to vote in BZ. In other
> words, making it so votes are not only filtered through forum
> volunteers and their recommendations. Open it up.
>
>> In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and vote for
>> the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always
>> been said that the only interface between devs and users should be the BZ.
>> And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this is the
>> best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and this is
>> not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants to make
>> their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and it means
>> that it is not a really important idea.
>> How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly?
>>
>
> You misunderstand. We should still use BZ to collect feedback on BZ
> issues. My suggestions were aimed at making this feedback more
> relevant, so it is not just project insiders voting, but getting a
> greater representation of what users want. We have had over 40
> million downloads. How many of these users having voted? How many
> even know they can vote. You asked why the votes are ignored. I'm
> suggesting that if the feedback is ancient and unrepresentative, that
> could be one reason.
>
>> Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any attention.
>> Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their
>> priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would
>> personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing reports,
>> voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all.
>>
>
> I'm telling you why I think the ancient votes are ignored. That's my
> belief. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But I think we
> agree that the votes are ignored today.
>
>> If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes, then we
>> have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the latter
>> are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden.
>>
>> Hagar
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
> Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit :
>
>> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
>> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
>> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
>> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
>> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
>> that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
>
>
> Argh, no!
> The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very detailed, not
> that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the
> problem.
Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is
why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the
troglodytes don't like that.
> Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator.
> Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression of a
> large install base.
>
They are less valid because they are ancient and do not necessarily
reflect what today's users want.
>
>
>> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
>> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
>> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
>> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
>> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
>> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
>
>
> What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should restart from
> scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback?
Yes. That is an accurate statement of my belief here. Feedback from
2002 issues, no matter how many ancient votes were attached, is
meaningless in 2013.
Note: if you are correct, that these votes are still relevant, then
new votes would quickly yield the same distribution and the same
issues would quickly end up with the same prioritization. And if I am
correct we would get a different distribution. But you must admit
that if we did reset that votes and a different distributed emerged,
then the new distribution would be the more accurate and more relevant
one. So I don't see what you are afraid of. Why not get the most
accurate feedback possible?
> If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself what is
> lacking (manpower / expertise / ...).
> What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I guess,
> so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users.
>
Read what I wrote. I suggested that we "remind users about voting
via a blog post." I never said anything about collecting feedback via
blog post comments. The idea would be to have a blog post that
explains how voting works and inviting users to vote in BZ. In other
words, making it so votes are not only filtered through forum
volunteers and their recommendations. Open it up.
> In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and vote for
> the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always
> been said that the only interface between devs and users should be the BZ.
> And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this is the
> best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and this is
> not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants to make
> their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and it means
> that it is not a really important idea.
> How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly?
>
You misunderstand. We should still use BZ to collect feedback on BZ
issues. My suggestions were aimed at making this feedback more
relevant, so it is not just project insiders voting, but getting a
greater representation of what users want. We have had over 40
million downloads. How many of these users having voted? How many
even know they can vote. You asked why the votes are ignored. I'm
suggesting that if the feedback is ancient and unrepresentative, that
could be one reason.
> Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any attention.
> Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their
> priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would
> personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing reports,
> voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all.
>
I'm telling you why I think the ancient votes are ignored. That's my
belief. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But I think we
agree that the votes are ignored today.
> If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes, then we
> have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the latter
> are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden.
>
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit :
> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
> that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
Argh, no!
The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very detailed, not that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the problem.
Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator.
Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression of a large install base.
> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should restart from scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback?
If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself what is lacking (manpower / expertise / ...).
What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I guess, so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users.
In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and vote for the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always been said that the only interface between devs and users should be the BZ. And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this is the best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and this is not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants to make their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and it means that it is not a really important idea.
How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly?
Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any attention. Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing reports, voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all.
If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes, then we have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the latter are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>> But it might be a valuable source of feedback, among
>> other sources.
>
> So maybe some kind of (a little bit) bond? In this respect, we agree that the desire for feedback only makes sense if one is willing to consider this feedback.
>
> (Please, this is not an accusation, because I'm sure the feedback is taken into account - I just wanted to say once how one can understand, namely as binding to wishes of the users.)
>
>> I'm not sure votes from 2002 are the most accurate way of determining
>> what users want.
>
> I do not know that. I noticed only the number of votes as I was reading the issue.
>
>> Maybe they are not so much aware of voting?
>
> yes, possible.
>
>> I had the
>> impression that previously voting was more "political",
>> and users
>> would lobby for votes on mailing lists, etc.
>
> yes, that is should be so. But it is not always negative, because lobbying can be useful.
>
But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a
large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful
and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote
counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we
received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me
that is more meaningful, since it is more current.
One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a
blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more
meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at
actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating
periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an
issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that.
-Rob
>> IMHO, there is what users really want, which is something abstract
>> which we can only know imperfectly.
>
> I agree with you completely here. At the same time I think it is important that we try to develop skills in order to better understand user.
>
> I say this because I am someone who can program, but not a programmer however in a literal sense, and I'm also someone of something of the mindset of users understood, without which I would be an expert in public relations.
>
>> When I bought my first house, and finally got out of an apartment, I
>> had the opportunity to have a big garden. I always wanted to have my
>> own garden, to grow what I wanted, to experiment with new plants, to
>> do everything I always wanted to do. So I made a big garden: flowers,
>> vegetables, berries, fruit trees, etc., 3000 square feet of garden.
>>
>> But by the middle of the summer the weeds started growing. At first I
>> was outside every day fighting the weeds. I tried all the recommended
>> techniques, but it was still labor intensive. Eventually the weeds
>> won. Why? My garden was too big for the resources I had.
>>
>> I remember how good I felt in March and April, planting all the
>> flowers, as well as how bad I felt in August when looking at all the
>> weeds.
>>
>> The secret of gardening is picking the right size garden, no bigger
>> than one that you can successfully maintain.
>
> Yes, a very illustrative description.
>
> by the way: I enjoy gardening.
>
>
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> But it might be a valuable source of feedback, among
> other sources.
So maybe some kind of (a little bit) bond? In this respect, we agree that the desire for feedback only makes sense if one is willing to consider this feedback.
(Please, this is not an accusation, because I'm sure the feedback is taken into account - I just wanted to say once how one can understand, namely as binding to wishes of the users.)
> I'm not sure votes from 2002 are the most accurate way of determining
> what users want.
I do not know that. I noticed only the number of votes as I was reading the issue.
> Maybe they are not so much aware of voting?
yes, possible.
> I had the
> impression that previously voting was more "political",
> and users
> would lobby for votes on mailing lists, etc.
yes, that is should be so. But it is not always negative, because lobbying can be useful.
> IMHO, there is what users really want, which is something abstract
> which we can only know imperfectly.
I agree with you completely here. At the same time I think it is important that we try to develop skills in order to better understand user.
I say this because I am someone who can program, but not a programmer however in a literal sense, and I'm also someone of something of the mindset of users understood, without which I would be an expert in public relations.
> When I bought my first house, and finally got out of an apartment, I
> had the opportunity to have a big garden. I always wanted to have my
> own garden, to grow what I wanted, to experiment with new plants, to
> do everything I always wanted to do. So I made a big garden: flowers,
> vegetables, berries, fruit trees, etc., 3000 square feet of garden.
>
> But by the middle of the summer the weeds started growing. At first I
> was outside every day fighting the weeds. I tried all the recommended
> techniques, but it was still labor intensive. Eventually the weeds
> won. Why? My garden was too big for the resources I had.
>
> I remember how good I felt in March and April, planting all the
> flowers, as well as how bad I felt in August when looking at all the
> weeds.
>
> The secret of gardening is picking the right size garden, no bigger
> than one that you can successfully maintain.
Yes, a very illustrative description.
by the way: I enjoy gardening.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> By a request in the forum (http://de.openoffice.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=61365), I get the information, the Issue #3959 was not implemented since 2002, although he has already received 355 votes.
>
> (Note: the implementation of the issues is not particularly important to me, I personally have not even voted for it.)
>
> I know it, earlier in OpenOffice, org, not practice was unfortunately votes cast for issues as direct, binding standard for their implementation to consider, But how is that today?.
>
Binding? No. But it might be a valuable source of feedback, among
other sources.
> It is clear to me the AOO is created by volunteers who choose their detailed tasks themselves, but should we not also be a concern comply with the interests of the users of AOO?
I'm not sure votes from 2002 are the most accurate way of determining
what users want. For example, I think we'd agree that the
most-critical issue in 3.4.1 is the profile-related crash. But the
Bugzilla issue for this has received *zero* votes:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
So I wonder whether the way users interact with Bugzilla is different
today? Maybe they are not so much aware of voting? I had the
impression that previously voting was more "political", and users
would lobby for votes on mailing lists, etc. We don't see that today.
> That would not only be of practical benefit to users, but would also enhance the reputation of AOO, as in the practice oriented project.
>
> Why the latter is important?
> I think because of the positive reputation of AOO in public grow the number of our supporters (sponsors, supporters, developers) will be.
>
IMHO, there is what users really want, which is something abstract
which we can only know imperfectly. And then there are sources of
information that indicate what that might be. Votes are one source of
info, but not the only source, and probably not the best source, at
least how they are used (or not used) today.
> My view:
> We should not emulate LibreOffice because LibreOffice may be innovative, but public statements about quality and consistency of LibreOffice are devastating.
> For example, the chairman of the FroDeV spoke (a German association for the promotion of free software) this publicly recently plain text, see:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
> (Sorry only in German)
>
When I bought my first house, and finally got out of an apartment, I
had the opportunity to have a big garden. I always wanted to have my
own garden, to grow what I wanted, to experiment with new plants, to
do everything I always wanted to do. So I made a big garden: flowers,
vegetables, berries, fruit trees, etc., 3000 square feet of garden.
But by the middle of the summer the weeds started growing. At first I
was outside every day fighting the weeds. I tried all the recommended
techniques, but it was still labor intensive. Eventually the weeds
won. Why? My garden was too big for the resources I had.
I remember how good I felt in March and April, planting all the
flowers, as well as how bad I felt in August when looking at all the
weeds.
The secret of gardening is picking the right size garden, no bigger
than one that you can successfully maintain.
-Rob
>
>
> My questions are:
>
> Are there any agreements which result to have the number of votes for an issue? Is there some agreement that a high number of votes to be reason, the implementation of Issues to be considered as a priority?
>
> What is your basic view on this?
>
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/18/13 1:49 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>> A promise to do what?
>
> The opinion of the user to be taken seriously because you have asked him to speak his mind.
>
>> But a feature request?
>
> This is an opinion of our users. It should be important to us.
>
>> I see zero obligation, legal, [...], social,
>> or otherwise, for us to do anything other than say, "Thank you for the
>> suggestion".
>
> Yes, this is formally correct, but you do not notice it much here depends on the tone of voice?
>
> ("the tone of voice" --> in german i mean: es kommt auf den Tonfall an mit dem wir öffentlich etwas sagen)
>
>> moral
>
> I think so.
> It's about respect for what we bring to our users, because it is a fundamental difference between what we need to do and what we should do so voluntarily.
>
>>> It is not the problem of the user in evaluating old Votes
>> Votes unlike new, because we have no contract with the user,
>> but it's about credibility, our credibility.
>>>
>>
>> We need to set the right expectations. If we set expectations that we
>> are all supermen and can write C++ code in our sleep, and our cats can
>> write Java code while playing with balls of yarn, then yes we will
>> lose credibility. But a different kind of credibility is the kind
>> that attracts developers, which is saying that developers on the
>> project work on the features that are important to them, and the
>> direction of the project is determined by the collective priorities of
>> those who are doing the actual work. That kind of credibility is a
>> very important kind, since that is what helps us recruit developers.
>
> Once again: this is not controversial.
>
> Dispute seems to me that we should find right words to our users if we justify that.
>
> There is (imho) a great difference whether we say we can not, or whether we say the user would have no right.
>
> An example of what I mean:
> If I had a business and sell something, it may be I've just not all at the warehouse thing a customer, the customer then I will _ask for understanding_, but I will _not tell him he had no right_ to buy a certain product immediately .
>
> In AOO we do not sell product, but we are still committed to our credibility, and even a little for the credibility of free software.
>
> This is my opinion.
>
>> Of course, if we don't make a product that users want, then we become
>> irrelevant.
>
> Yes, that's the point.
>
>> But a look at our popularity via download numbers shows
>> that we are highly relevant,
>
> And how do we evaluate, for example, that one of the biggest public users of OpenOffice, the city of Munich, has declared to want to switch to LibreOffice?
> (see: http://www.it-muenchen-blog.de/2012/10/libre-office-fur-munchen/)
this can happened at any time and it depends on the decision makers of
the related project. In this case the decision was probably made when
the future of OpenOffice was not so clear as it is at the moment. And
Munich paid for some development work to improve the OOXML support via
the OSBA initiative. We all know that these work is not available in AOO.
>
> This is (imho) a big loss for AOO.
if we make the better product in the long term they will potentially
switch back. For now we have no complete story for OOXML and on the
other hand LO can pick all the nice improvements that we will introduce.
And I am sure they will, they mirror our repo on a regular basis and do
cherry picking. They will probably continue to deny this or at least not
mention it in public but that is a different issue that don't help open
source in general.
Juergen
>
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/18/13 5:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>>>>>>> seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>>>>>>> make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds fine for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>>>>>>> think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>>>>>>> untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>>>>>>> existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
>>>> to
>>>>>> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>>>>>>> many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>>>>>>> with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
>>>> to
>>>>>> make it transparent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
>>>> it
>>>>>> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>>>>>> that's a good thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>>>>>> wishes of users.
>>>>>> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>>>>>> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
>>>> you
>>>>> understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
>>>>> our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
>>>>> if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
>>>>> as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
>>>> should I
>>>>> fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
>>>> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
>>>> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
>>>> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
>>>> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
>>>> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
>>>>> survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
>>>>> requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
>>>>> respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
>>>> not relevant at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
>>> unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
>>> provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
>>> solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
>>> more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. If you want to argue the
>> contrary you would need to explain what the relevance is of issues
>> that are 10-years old and have not been touched and probably never
>> will be. I might as well keep in a box my letters to Santa Claus from
>> when I was a child, in hopes that they may be someday delivered. If
>> something has not been touched for 10 years this is an extremely
>> strong indication that it is irrelevant. Things that are important
>> tend to be done. Things that are not important do not get done. I
>> know of no other measure for determining this.
>
> I don't think that it help us forward if we nitpicking further about
> different understanding if something is still relevant or obsolete.
>
> The point is that Rob is correct to assume that if a 10 year old
> issue/RFE is not yet addressed it will be likely not addressed in the
> next 10 years if not a huge bunch of developers fall down of heaven.
>
> The question is if we want to use the voting feature in the future if it
> is useful to reset the current votes or at least review the current
> issues with high votes and mark them as invalid/won't fix or whatever to
> get a clean start point.
>
> In general I would like to make use of the voting feature but with the
> current state I am not sure if it make sense. Many issues that probably
> nobody will fix in the near future.
>
Maybe we could look at the change in vote counts rather than the
absolute value of the vote count? For example, an RFE that receives
10 new votes in March might be more meaningful then one that received
100 votes in 2002-2005. So we don't actually need to reset any counts
to zero in Bugzilla. We can get the same results by reporting the
vote delta.
-Rob
> For example issues with 2 votes of the same person are completely
> irrelevant to me. The fall in the category of hey my issue is the most
> important one, why don't you fix it. What is more important than my
> issue ...
>
>
> Juergen
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
>>> well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
>>> many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
>>> forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
>>>
>>> The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
>>> tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
>>> there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
>>> that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
>>> feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
>>>
>>> Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ricardo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
>>>> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
>>>> years.
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
>>>> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
>>>> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
>>>> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
>>>> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
>>>> users actually think today.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>> Just my 2¢
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ricardo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Dave Fisher wrote:
> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who
> are more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I
> trust their judgement.
Indeed. No reasons to elaborate further. We have votes in Bugzilla; we
can only keep them and, in case we want to use them as binding
indications rather than suggestions (e.g., if we commit to fix the top
three issues, sorted by votes), new votes will quickly supersede the old
ones. Until then, it's harmless to keep them around.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by David Gerard <dg...@gmail.com>.
On 19 March 2013 01:21, Guenter Marxen <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents to
> solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
> stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that some
> old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
The CADT model: http://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
- d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Guenter Marxen
<gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a little bit the impression, that Rob and Jürgen are not
> understanding, what is meant.
>
> There is no demand, that special issues shouldt be resolved asap.
> There is no demand, to give a date or release, when the issue is resolved.
>
> There is only the wish, issues not to reset or to delete, that users find
> _important to make their work with OpenOffice easier and better_.
>
> The fact, that a user does not repeat his comments or requests each year,
> does not mean, that he is no longer interrested in the issue.
>
> It was good practice in the "old" community (as far as I know), that issues
> and comments and votes never were reset or deleted. And it would be
> contra-productive to begin with such "customs" in the "new" community.
>
> There is no missunderstanding (at least on my side) about this project, the
> ressources and possibilities and I read (or remember) not any comment by
> others in this thread, that could be interpreted in this sense.
>
> But to mention it here, Rob: There was one developer who "cared" for 5608 in
> 2008 (see "down under").
>
Hopefully we agree on more than we disagree about. Specifically, I
hope we agree that:
1) User feedback is important. If we're not producing what users want
then we're in trouble.
2) Getting accurate user feedback is more important than getting just
any user feedback. In other words, if user feedback is important,
then it is also important that we get user feedback in a way that is
accurate, unbiased and reflective of typical user preferences.
3) Knowing what users want *today* is more important than know what
their preferences were 10 years ago. This is living project not an
archive of trends and fads from 2002. Although we might all have
*opinions* on what user preferences are today, and we might even
*believe* that they is unchanged over the last decade, this *belief*
is an inadequate substitute for actually measuring what user
preferences are today (Again, if it is important, then it is
important to do it right).
4) The rank ordering of preferences is what counts, not any absolute
vote count. Whether the #1 issues has 4000 votes, 400 votes or 40
votes, does not matter, provided the votes are representative and
unbiased.
5) If user preferences in fact have not changed over the last decade
then resetting the vote counts would have no effect on the rank
ordering. We would quickly arrive at the same rankings, although
there would be a different absolute vote count. But if preferences
have changed then the ranks might be different. But either way,
whether this confirms the past preferences or shows new preferences,
this information is very valuable to have, more so than preserving a
museum of historical votes.
Hopefully we agree on the above.
Given that, I believe the existing historical vote counts have strong
methodological problems and are almost useful for determining what
user preferences actually are.
Consider:
Since 2002 we have received 9569 feature/enhancement requests. Of
those 2747 received at least one vote. But that means that most of
them, 71%, received no votes, not even from their original submitters.
This suggests lack of awareness that voting was even possible.
There is also evidence that many who voted were targeted by various
lobbying efforts, via list or forum posts, or even blog posts, to
"please vote for my issue". So high vote counts are the product of
political efforts by project insiders, astroturfing more than actual
typical user preferences.
We know, from other feedback mechanisms, like Facebook, the users
mailing list, etc., that the #1 feature request *today* is for an iOS
or Android version of OpenOffice. We get requests like this every
day, sometimes more than once day. Guess how many votes this request
has in Bugzilla? Zero. Actually, this is a trick question. No one
has even bothered to enter this as a feature request in Bugzilla. But
that proves the point. We have extremely strong reason to believe
that the Bugzilla vote counts do not reflect user preferences today.
The Bugzilla vote counts, in the large view of things, are extremely
thin. around 400 votes for the top issue over a decade for a product
that gets 1 million downloads a week. We have the ability to get real
user feedback, in a much more representative way. Why would we be
satisfied with the 10 year old dubious vote counts a small number of
project insiders?
In summary, I'm trying very hard to make user feedback count for
something in this project. But that means we need good data. I could
use your help, rather than your resistance, to encourage the project
to gather accurate, representative, unbiased feedback. Again, I see
no reason to fear this. If your particular issue is truly something
users want, then it will rise to the top in any unbiased survey right?
And if it is not something users want, then we do a disservice to the
project if we falsely prop it up based on decade old votes. I hope
you would agree.
User feedback is important, so let's make an effort to do it right!
-Rob
> Some further comments inline:
>
> Am 19.03.2013 17:15, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>
>> On 3/19/13 5:04 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
>>>>> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I
>>>>>>> trust
>>>>>
>>>>> their
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> judgement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look f.e. at issue 5608
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose it depends on how you define "important".
>
>
> There is nothing to suppose because I defined it: Working better on "...long
> texts with (many) references".
> That's surely far from being 'important for everyone'.
>
>
> Since issue 5608
>>>>>
>>>>> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
>>>>> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
>>>>> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
>>>>> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
>>>>> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
>>>>> as I can imagine.
>
>
> Your arguing is not reasonable, because importance is never defined by mere
> numbers. I accept, that "important" issues are not touched because of lack
> of ressources. But f.e. the second mentioned issue 11901 is a great
> disadvantage and "incompatibility" compared with the leading word processor.
>
>
>>>>> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
>>>>> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
>>>>> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
>>>>> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
>
>
> They "vote" relying on their "preferences" and "likes".
>
> A developer, who never writes long texts with many references may say 5608
> is unimportant and I accept his opinion. But perhaps in short time, a new
> volunteer really understands the issue and likes to work on it.
>
>
>>>>> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
>
>
> I am not extremly touchy. ;-)
>
>>>> Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of
>>>> a
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do
>>>> that
>>>> simply because nobody did it before".
>
>
> RGB ES, you are right. Thanks.
>
>
>>> But this is not a case of "we don't have someone right now to work on
>>> it". It is not a case of "not today, but maybe next week". This is
>>> not a case of "Sorry, we can't fit it in this release, but maybe we'll
>>> do it in the next release." What this is is a case where no one,
>>> absolutely no one, zero, zip, nada, gar nichts, nobody has cared to
>>> deal with the issue in over a decade. That screams out UNIMPORTANT.
>
>
> Strange logic and false. That only screams out, that there was (or remained)
> nobody, who understood the function or who had the time to work on it.
>
> But see comment #38 by Mathias Bauer (StarDivision/Sun, 2008), who "cared"
> and targeted 5608 to 3.x. The reason why it was not resolved then, seems
> clear to me.
>
>
>>> Remember, there is such thing as false hope. And if ever there was an
>>> example of false hope it is someone hoping for a decade old issue in
>>> Bugzilla that has been passed by by thousands of other issues.
>
>
> Strange logic. I'm not in a sentimental mood. But resolving enhancement
> issues like 5608 and 11901 would be a valuable improvement for a not so tiny
> group of users (f.e. at universities and alike).
>
> But you are completely right, for the "tiny text writers" these issues are
> "not important", they even do not need Writer. (Are this the target users of
> AOO?)
>
>
>> I believe this thread will not bring any new information and we should
>> probably let die it.
>> Issues with votes are seen still as valid by some people and so let
>> these issues in BZ as they are. We should not give any guarantee that an
>> issue with many votes will be fixed in a future version. We should
>> better communicate that votes are one instrument to express additional
>> demand for an issue or RFE that developers potentially take into account
>> to set their own priorities.
>>
>> I don't see that we can do more now but we should watch these issues to
>> ensure that we don't miss some really important ideas or bugfixes.
>
>
> As said, I wish only, that such issues are not reset or deleted. There's
> nothing to do.
>
> But it would be wonderfull, when all hard work is completely done and AOO is
> finished for eternity then you resolve issues 5608 and 11901...
>
>
> --
> Grüße
>
> Günter Marxen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Guenter Marxen <gu...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
I have a little bit the impression, that Rob and Jürgen are not
understanding, what is meant.
There is no demand, that special issues shouldt be resolved asap.
There is no demand, to give a date or release, when the issue is resolved.
There is only the wish, issues not to reset or to delete, that users
find _important to make their work with OpenOffice easier and better_.
The fact, that a user does not repeat his comments or requests each
year, does not mean, that he is no longer interrested in the issue.
It was good practice in the "old" community (as far as I know), that
issues and comments and votes never were reset or deleted. And it would
be contra-productive to begin with such "customs" in the "new" community.
There is no missunderstanding (at least on my side) about this project,
the ressources and possibilities and I read (or remember) not any
comment by others in this thread, that could be interpreted in this sense.
But to mention it here, Rob: There was one developer who "cared" for
5608 in 2008 (see "down under").
Some further comments inline:
Am 19.03.2013 17:15, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> On 3/19/13 5:04 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
>>>> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
>>>>>> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust
>>>> their
>>>>>> judgement.
>>>>>...
>>>>> Look f.e. at issue 5608
>>>>
>>>> I suppose it depends on how you define "important".
There is nothing to suppose because I defined it: Working better on
"...long texts with (many) references".
That's surely far from being 'important for everyone'.
Since issue 5608
>>>> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
>>>> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
>>>> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
>>>> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
>>>> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
>>>> as I can imagine.
Your arguing is not reasonable, because importance is never defined by
mere numbers. I accept, that "important" issues are not touched because
of lack of ressources. But f.e. the second mentioned issue 11901 is a
great disadvantage and "incompatibility" compared with the leading word
processor.
>>>> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
>>>> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
>>>> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
>>>> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
They "vote" relying on their "preferences" and "likes".
A developer, who never writes long texts with many references may say
5608 is unimportant and I accept his opinion. But perhaps in short time,
a new volunteer really understands the issue and likes to work on it.
>>>> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
I am not extremly touchy. ;-)
>>> Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of a
>>> ...
>>> I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do that
>>> simply because nobody did it before".
RGB ES, you are right. Thanks.
>> But this is not a case of "we don't have someone right now to work on
>> it". It is not a case of "not today, but maybe next week". This is
>> not a case of "Sorry, we can't fit it in this release, but maybe we'll
>> do it in the next release." What this is is a case where no one,
>> absolutely no one, zero, zip, nada, gar nichts, nobody has cared to
>> deal with the issue in over a decade. That screams out UNIMPORTANT.
Strange logic and false. That only screams out, that there was (or
remained) nobody, who understood the function or who had the time to
work on it.
But see comment #38 by Mathias Bauer (StarDivision/Sun, 2008), who
"cared" and targeted 5608 to 3.x. The reason why it was not resolved
then, seems clear to me.
>> Remember, there is such thing as false hope. And if ever there was an
>> example of false hope it is someone hoping for a decade old issue in
>> Bugzilla that has been passed by by thousands of other issues.
Strange logic. I'm not in a sentimental mood. But resolving enhancement
issues like 5608 and 11901 would be a valuable improvement for a not so
tiny group of users (f.e. at universities and alike).
But you are completely right, for the "tiny text writers" these issues
are "not important", they even do not need Writer. (Are this the target
users of AOO?)
> I believe this thread will not bring any new information and we should
> probably let die it.
> Issues with votes are seen still as valid by some people and so let
> these issues in BZ as they are. We should not give any guarantee that an
> issue with many votes will be fixed in a future version. We should
> better communicate that votes are one instrument to express additional
> demand for an issue or RFE that developers potentially take into account
> to set their own priorities.
>
> I don't see that we can do more now but we should watch these issues to
> ensure that we don't miss some really important ideas or bugfixes.
As said, I wish only, that such issues are not reset or deleted. There's
nothing to do.
But it would be wonderfull, when all hard work is completely done and
AOO is finished for eternity then you resolve issues 5608 and 11901...
--
Grüße
Günter Marxen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/19/13 5:04 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
>>> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>>>
>>>>> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
>>>>> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust
>>> their
>>>>> judgement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in
>>> this
>>>> case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like an
>>>> offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or voted
>>> for
>>>> issues for many years.
>>>>
>>>> I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
>>>> references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
>>>> universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug
>>> and
>>>> enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
>>>>
>>>> Look f.e. at issue 5608
>>>> (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
>>>>
>>>> It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not
>>> find
>>>> "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I voted for
>>> it
>>>> in 2004.)
>>>> Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains a
>>>> very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts with
>>>> (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
>>>>
>>>
>>> I suppose it depends on how you define "important". Since issue 5608
>>> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
>>> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
>>> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
>>> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
>>> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
>>> as I can imagine.
>>>
>>> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
>>> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
>>> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
>>> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
>>>
>>> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
>>> important. We're all entitled to our personal preferences, and if you
>>> say something is important to you then I will gladly accept that. But
>>> from a project perspective, I think it is clear that an issue that was
>>> bypassed by 36054 other issues for over a decade, that an issue like
>>> this is certainly not a likely candidate for a"high priority"
>>> designation. The "votes" from project members, via their actions, has
>>> put 36054 other issues ahead of it.
>>>
>>
>> Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of a
>> developer is a sort of "vote", and a really important one, but it is NOT
>> the same vote we are discussing here: votes on issues are cast by users,
>> not by developers. Votes are not a measure of feasibility but of hope:
>> there is a HUGE difference between saying "we are sorry, we don't have the
>> resources to implement this right now" and "because nobody implemented this
>> before, your issue is not that important for the community so we are
>> forgetting your votes". After all, those users that voted ARE an important
>> part of the community.
>>
>> I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do that
>> simply because nobody did it before".
>>
>
> But this is not a case of "we don't have someone right now to work on
> it". It is not a case of "not today, but maybe next week". This is
> not a case of "Sorry, we can't fit it in this release, but maybe we'll
> do it in the next release." What this is is a case where no one,
> absolutely no one, zero, zip, nada, gar nichts, nobody has cared to
> deal with the issue in over a decade. That screams out UNIMPORTANT.
> Remember, there is such thing as false hope. And if ever there was an
> example of false hope it is someone hoping for a decade old issue in
> Bugzilla that has been passed by by thousands of other issues.
I believe this thread will not bring any new information and we should
probably let die it.
Issues with votes are seen still as valid by some people and so let
these issues in BZ as they are. We should not give any guarantee that an
issue with many votes will be fixed in a future version. We should
better communicate that votes are one instrument to express additional
demand for an issue or RFE that developers potentially take into account
to set their own priorities.
I don't see that we can do more now but we should watch these issues to
ensure that we don't miss some really important ideas or bugfixes.
Juergen
>
> -Rob
>
>> As Guenter said before, the fact that an old issue is still there does not
>> means that it is not important, it only means that it was not possible, for
>> whatever reason, to solve it.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ricardo
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>> The same is valid for issue 11901
>>>> (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
>>>>
>>>> I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents
>>> to
>>>> solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
>>>> stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that
>>> some
>>>> old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
>>>>
>>>> Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with
>>> many
>>>> votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let the
>>>> volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most
>>> important"
>>>> issues in the list.
>>>> And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all
>>> of
>>>> them! But that does not change the importance of such issues (provided
>>> that
>>>> importance is not only measured by age).
>>>>
>>>> Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as
>>> an
>>>> "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
>>>> individual votes.
>>>>
>>>> If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and
>>> be
>>>> patient).
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Grüße
>>>>
>>>> Günter Marxen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
>>> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>> >
>>> >> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
>>> >> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust
>>> their
>>> >> judgement.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in
>>> this
>>> > case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like an
>>> > offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or voted
>>> for
>>> > issues for many years.
>>> >
>>> > I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
>>> > references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
>>> > universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug
>>> and
>>> > enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
>>> >
>>> > Look f.e. at issue 5608
>>> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
>>> >
>>> > It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not
>>> find
>>> > "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I voted for
>>> it
>>> > in 2004.)
>>> > Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains a
>>> > very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts with
>>> > (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
>>> >
>>>
>>> I suppose it depends on how you define "important". Since issue 5608
>>> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
>>> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
>>> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
>>> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
>>> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
>>> as I can imagine.
>>>
>>> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
>>> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
>>> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
>>> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
>>>
>>> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
>>> important. We're all entitled to our personal preferences, and if you
>>> say something is important to you then I will gladly accept that. But
>>> from a project perspective, I think it is clear that an issue that was
>>> bypassed by 36054 other issues for over a decade, that an issue like
>>> this is certainly not a likely candidate for a"high priority"
>>> designation. The "votes" from project members, via their actions, has
>>> put 36054 other issues ahead of it.
>>>
>>
>> Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of a
>> developer is a sort of "vote", and a really important one, but it is NOT
>> the same vote we are discussing here: votes on issues are cast by users,
>> not by developers. Votes are not a measure of feasibility but of hope:
>> there is a HUGE difference between saying "we are sorry, we don't have the
>> resources to implement this right now" and "because nobody implemented this
>> before, your issue is not that important for the community so we are
>> forgetting your votes". After all, those users that voted ARE an important
>> part of the community.
>>
>> I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do that
>> simply because nobody did it before".
>>
>
> But this is not a case of "we don't have someone right now to work on
> it". It is not a case of "not today, but maybe next week". This is
> not a case of "Sorry, we can't fit it in this release, but maybe we'll
> do it in the next release." What this is is a case where no one,
> absolutely no one, zero, zip, nada, gar nichts, nobody has cared to
> deal with the issue in over a decade. That screams out UNIMPORTANT.
> Remember, there is such thing as false hope. And if ever there was an
> example of false hope it is someone hoping for a decade old issue in
> Bugzilla that has been passed by by thousands of other issues.
>
Of course, feel free to prove me wrong and get one of these ancient
issues resolved. But in the end even minor actions count more than
"important" wishes.
I believe I've made my point.
-Rob
> -Rob
>
>> As Guenter said before, the fact that an old issue is still there does not
>> means that it is not important, it only means that it was not possible, for
>> whatever reason, to solve it.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ricardo
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> > The same is valid for issue 11901
>>> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
>>> >
>>> > I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents
>>> to
>>> > solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
>>> > stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that
>>> some
>>> > old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
>>> >
>>> > Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with
>>> many
>>> > votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let the
>>> > volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most
>>> important"
>>> > issues in the list.
>>> > And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all
>>> of
>>> > them! But that does not change the importance of such issues (provided
>>> that
>>> > importance is not only measured by age).
>>> >
>>> > Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as
>>> an
>>> > "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
>>> > individual votes.
>>> >
>>> > If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and
>>> be
>>> > patient).
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Grüße
>>> >
>>> > Günter Marxen
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
>> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> >
>> >> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
>> >> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust
>> their
>> >> judgement.
>> >
>> >
>> > as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in
>> this
>> > case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like an
>> > offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or voted
>> for
>> > issues for many years.
>> >
>> > I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
>> > references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
>> > universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug
>> and
>> > enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
>> >
>> > Look f.e. at issue 5608
>> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
>> >
>> > It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not
>> find
>> > "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I voted for
>> it
>> > in 2004.)
>> > Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains a
>> > very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts with
>> > (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
>> >
>>
>> I suppose it depends on how you define "important". Since issue 5608
>> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
>> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
>> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
>> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
>> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
>> as I can imagine.
>>
>> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
>> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
>> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
>> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
>>
>> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
>> important. We're all entitled to our personal preferences, and if you
>> say something is important to you then I will gladly accept that. But
>> from a project perspective, I think it is clear that an issue that was
>> bypassed by 36054 other issues for over a decade, that an issue like
>> this is certainly not a likely candidate for a"high priority"
>> designation. The "votes" from project members, via their actions, has
>> put 36054 other issues ahead of it.
>>
>
> Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of a
> developer is a sort of "vote", and a really important one, but it is NOT
> the same vote we are discussing here: votes on issues are cast by users,
> not by developers. Votes are not a measure of feasibility but of hope:
> there is a HUGE difference between saying "we are sorry, we don't have the
> resources to implement this right now" and "because nobody implemented this
> before, your issue is not that important for the community so we are
> forgetting your votes". After all, those users that voted ARE an important
> part of the community.
>
> I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do that
> simply because nobody did it before".
>
But this is not a case of "we don't have someone right now to work on
it". It is not a case of "not today, but maybe next week". This is
not a case of "Sorry, we can't fit it in this release, but maybe we'll
do it in the next release." What this is is a case where no one,
absolutely no one, zero, zip, nada, gar nichts, nobody has cared to
deal with the issue in over a decade. That screams out UNIMPORTANT.
Remember, there is such thing as false hope. And if ever there was an
example of false hope it is someone hoping for a decade old issue in
Bugzilla that has been passed by by thousands of other issues.
-Rob
> As Guenter said before, the fact that an old issue is still there does not
> means that it is not important, it only means that it was not possible, for
> whatever reason, to solve it.
>
> Regards
> Ricardo
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> > The same is valid for issue 11901
>> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
>> >
>> > I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents
>> to
>> > solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
>> > stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that
>> some
>> > old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
>> >
>> > Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with
>> many
>> > votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let the
>> > volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most
>> important"
>> > issues in the list.
>> > And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all
>> of
>> > them! But that does not change the importance of such issues (provided
>> that
>> > importance is not only measured by age).
>> >
>> > Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as
>> an
>> > "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
>> > individual votes.
>> >
>> > If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and
>> be
>> > patient).
>> >
>> > --
>> > Grüße
>> >
>> > Günter Marxen
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2013/3/19 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
> <gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
> >
> >> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
> >> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust
> their
> >> judgement.
> >
> >
> > as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in
> this
> > case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like an
> > offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or voted
> for
> > issues for many years.
> >
> > I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
> > references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
> > universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug
> and
> > enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
> >
> > Look f.e. at issue 5608
> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
> >
> > It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not
> find
> > "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I voted for
> it
> > in 2004.)
> > Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains a
> > very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts with
> > (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
> >
>
> I suppose it depends on how you define "important". Since issue 5608
> was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
> (31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
> bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
> #5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
> something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
> as I can imagine.
>
> Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
> They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
> since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
> enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
>
> I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
> important. We're all entitled to our personal preferences, and if you
> say something is important to you then I will gladly accept that. But
> from a project perspective, I think it is clear that an issue that was
> bypassed by 36054 other issues for over a decade, that an issue like
> this is certainly not a likely candidate for a"high priority"
> designation. The "votes" from project members, via their actions, has
> put 36054 other issues ahead of it.
>
Rob, I think you are missing the point here. I agree that the choice of a
developer is a sort of "vote", and a really important one, but it is NOT
the same vote we are discussing here: votes on issues are cast by users,
not by developers. Votes are not a measure of feasibility but of hope:
there is a HUGE difference between saying "we are sorry, we don't have the
resources to implement this right now" and "because nobody implemented this
before, your issue is not that important for the community so we are
forgetting your votes". After all, those users that voted ARE an important
part of the community.
I insist: "we cannot do that now" is not the same of "we will not do that
simply because nobody did it before".
As Guenter said before, the fact that an old issue is still there does not
means that it is not important, it only means that it was not possible, for
whatever reason, to solve it.
Regards
Ricardo
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > The same is valid for issue 11901
> > (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
> >
> > I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents
> to
> > solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
> > stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that
> some
> > old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
> >
> > Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with
> many
> > votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let the
> > volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most
> important"
> > issues in the list.
> > And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all
> of
> > them! But that does not change the importance of such issues (provided
> that
> > importance is not only measured by age).
> >
> > Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as
> an
> > "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
> > individual votes.
> >
> > If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and
> be
> > patient).
> >
> > --
> > Grüße
> >
> > Günter Marxen
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Guenter Marxen
<gu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>
>> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are
>> more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust their
>> judgement.
>
>
> as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in this
> case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like an
> offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or voted for
> issues for many years.
>
> I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
> references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
> universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug and
> enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
>
> Look f.e. at issue 5608
> (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
>
> It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not find
> "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I voted for it
> in 2004.)
> Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains a
> very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts with
> (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
>
I suppose it depends on how you define "important". Since issue 5608
was entered, back in 2002, we've fixed 36054 issues in Bugzilla.
(31064 defects, 3839 enhancements and 1151 features). So that many
bugs were fixed, or enhancements/features implemented, while issue
#5608 was not. I don't know how you define "important", but to me
something that is behind 36,054 other items is as close to unimportant
as I can imagine.
Remember, what things a developer chooses to code on is also a vote.
They vote with their time. I count that kind of vote very highly,
since it is backed up by actions. Those 36054 issues were important
enough for someone to actually invest their time into fixing it.
I don't mean to offend anyone by telling them that their issue is not
important. We're all entitled to our personal preferences, and if you
say something is important to you then I will gladly accept that. But
from a project perspective, I think it is clear that an issue that was
bypassed by 36054 other issues for over a decade, that an issue like
this is certainly not a likely candidate for a"high priority"
designation. The "votes" from project members, via their actions, has
put 36054 other issues ahead of it.
Regards,
-Rob
> The same is valid for issue 11901
> (https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
>
> I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents to
> solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that "old"
> stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think, that some
> old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
>
> Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with many
> votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let the
> volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most important"
> issues in the list.
> And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all of
> them! But that does not change the importance of such issues (provided that
> importance is not only measured by age).
>
> Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as an
> "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
> individual votes.
>
> If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and be
> patient).
>
> --
> Grüße
>
> Günter Marxen
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Guenter Marxen <gu...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
Am 18.03.2013 19:05, schrieb Dave Fisher:
> There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust their judgement.
as a longtime "OpenOffice"-user (since StarWriter 2.0), I think that in
this case, Rob is wrong and resetting the votes would be something like
an offense to us, the "old" users, who wrote and commented issues or
voted for issues for many years.
I mainly used Writer, writing long texts with many images and many
references (f.e. an SO-/OOo-manual, widely spread in the german speaking
universities) and in times before the turbulences around OOo I made bug
and enhancement issues and also voted for issues.
Look f.e. at issue 5608
(https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=5608).
It was raised in 2002 and the latest comment is dated 2012. (I did not
find "my votes" and the number of votes in bugzilla, but I think, I
voted for it in 2004.)
Although the issue is ten years old and nobody worked on it, it remains
a very important enhancement issue for all, who are writing long texts
with (many) references. The issue is not at all outdated!
The same is valid for issue 11901
(https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=11901) and many others.
I always have accepted, that the lack of ressources/developers prevents
to solve some/many issues "in time", but I could hardly accept, that
"old" stuff in bugzilla is reset/deleted and hence forgotten. I think,
that some old users ("issuers") would be frustrated.
Instead of resetting the votes, one could have a list of 'issues with
many votes', "weight" them (f.e. as proposed by a survey) and then let
the volunteers/developers decide, if they want to work on their "most
important" issues in the list.
And perhaps for another ten years nobody is found to work on some or all
of them! But that does not change the importance of such issues
(provided that importance is not only measured by age).
Special cases are concerns/issues by "users" like the city of Munich (as
an "beacon project", Leuchtturmprojekt), which can weight more than 1000
individual votes.
If the process is transparent, users and "issuers" will understand (and
be patient).
--
Grüße
Günter Marxen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
Top post.
There is no consensus here to eliminate or reset the votes. Some who are more in touch with users have stated that it would be harmful. I trust their judgement.
Issues that are recent that get votes should be discernible by developers looking at BZ. Any issue with a lot of votes might be interesting for a new developer. Reveal codes could become reveal ODF someone with a C++ programming dog and a java programming cat might do it someday.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 18, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/18/13 5:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>>>>>>> seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>>>>>>> make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds fine for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>>>>>>> think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>>>>>>> untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>>>>>>> existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
>>>> to
>>>>>> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>>>>>>> many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>>>>>>> with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
>>>> to
>>>>>> make it transparent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
>>>> it
>>>>>> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>>>>>> that's a good thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>>>>>> wishes of users.
>>>>>> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>>>>>> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
>>>> you
>>>>> understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
>>>>> our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
>>>>> if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
>>>>> as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
>>>> should I
>>>>> fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
>>>> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
>>>> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
>>>> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
>>>> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
>>>> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
>>>>> survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
>>>>> requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
>>>>> respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
>>>> not relevant at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
>>> unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
>>> provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
>>> solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
>>> more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. If you want to argue the
>> contrary you would need to explain what the relevance is of issues
>> that are 10-years old and have not been touched and probably never
>> will be. I might as well keep in a box my letters to Santa Claus from
>> when I was a child, in hopes that they may be someday delivered. If
>> something has not been touched for 10 years this is an extremely
>> strong indication that it is irrelevant. Things that are important
>> tend to be done. Things that are not important do not get done. I
>> know of no other measure for determining this.
>
> I don't think that it help us forward if we nitpicking further about
> different understanding if something is still relevant or obsolete.
>
> The point is that Rob is correct to assume that if a 10 year old
> issue/RFE is not yet addressed it will be likely not addressed in the
> next 10 years if not a huge bunch of developers fall down of heaven.
>
> The question is if we want to use the voting feature in the future if it
> is useful to reset the current votes or at least review the current
> issues with high votes and mark them as invalid/won't fix or whatever to
> get a clean start point.
>
> In general I would like to make use of the voting feature but with the
> current state I am not sure if it make sense. Many issues that probably
> nobody will fix in the near future.
>
> For example issues with 2 votes of the same person are completely
> irrelevant to me. The fall in the category of hey my issue is the most
> important one, why don't you fix it. What is more important than my
> issue ...
>
>
> Juergen
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
>>> well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
>>> many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
>>> forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
>>>
>>> The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
>>> tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
>>> there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
>>> that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
>>> feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
>>>
>>> Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ricardo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
>>>> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
>>>> years.
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
>>>> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
>>>> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
>>>> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
>>>> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
>>>> users actually think today.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>> Just my 2¢
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ricardo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 18.03.2013 18:08, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 3/18/13 5:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>>>>>>> seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>>>>>>> make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds fine for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>>>>>>> think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>>>>>>> untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>>>>>>> existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
>>>> to
>>>>>> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>>>>>>> many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>>>>>>> with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
>>>> to
>>>>>> make it transparent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
>>>> it
>>>>>> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>>>>>> that's a good thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>>>>>> wishes of users.
>>>>>> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>>>>>> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
>>>> you
>>>>> understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
>>>>> our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
>>>>> if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
>>>>> as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
>>>> should I
>>>>> fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
>>>> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
>>>> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
>>>> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
>>>> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
>>>> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
>>>>> survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
>>>>> requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
>>>>> respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
>>>> not relevant at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
>>> unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
>>> provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
>>> solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
>>> more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. If you want to argue the
>> contrary you would need to explain what the relevance is of issues
>> that are 10-years old and have not been touched and probably never
>> will be. I might as well keep in a box my letters to Santa Claus from
>> when I was a child, in hopes that they may be someday delivered. If
>> something has not been touched for 10 years this is an extremely
>> strong indication that it is irrelevant. Things that are important
>> tend to be done. Things that are not important do not get done. I
>> know of no other measure for determining this.
>
> I don't think that it help us forward if we nitpicking further about
> different understanding if something is still relevant or obsolete.
>
+1
> The point is that Rob is correct to assume that if a 10 year old
> issue/RFE is not yet addressed it will be likely not addressed in the
> next 10 years if not a huge bunch of developers fall down of heaven.
>
It depends from my point of view.
An issue which is "untouched" by development for 10 years, but had been
constantly "touched" by users giving comments and votes should be
relevant from my perspective.
> The question is if we want to use the voting feature in the future if it
> is useful to reset the current votes or at least review the current
> issues with high votes and mark them as invalid/won't fix or whatever to
> get a clean start point.
>
> In general I would like to make use of the voting feature but with the
> current state I am not sure if it make sense. Many issues that probably
> nobody will fix in the near future.
>
A clean start point sounds reasonable for me.
But I also think that we should not lose the votes from certain
high-counters which got constant attention in the last months.
A possible solution could be:
- establish/revise the usage and the meaning of votes for Bugzilla issues.
- keep the former vote count of such issues in a read-only custom field.
- reset the vote count
Best regards, Oliver.
> For example issues with 2 votes of the same person are completely
> irrelevant to me. The fall in the category of hey my issue is the most
> important one, why don't you fix it. What is more important than my
> issue ...
>
>
> Juergen
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
>>> well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
>>> many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
>>> forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
>>>
>>> The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
>>> tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
>>> there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
>>> that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
>>> feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
>>>
>>> Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ricardo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
>>>> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
>>>> years.
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
>>>> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
>>>> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
>>>> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
>>>> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
>>>> users actually think today.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>> Just my 2¢
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ricardo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 3/18/13 5:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>>>>>> seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>>>>>> make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds fine for me.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>>>>>> think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>>>>>> untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>>>>>> existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
>>> to
>>>>> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>>>>>> many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>>>>>> with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
>>> to
>>>>> make it transparent.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
>>> it
>>>>> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>>>>> that's a good thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>>>>> wishes of users.
>>>>> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>>>>> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1.
>>>>
>>>> There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
>>> you
>>>> understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
>>>> our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
>>>> if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
>>>> as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
>>> should I
>>>> fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
>>> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
>>> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
>>> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
>>> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
>>> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>>>
>>>> If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
>>>> survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
>>>> requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
>>>> respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
>>> not relevant at all.
>>
>>
>> The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
>> unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
>> provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
>> solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
>> more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
>
>
> Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. If you want to argue the
> contrary you would need to explain what the relevance is of issues
> that are 10-years old and have not been touched and probably never
> will be. I might as well keep in a box my letters to Santa Claus from
> when I was a child, in hopes that they may be someday delivered. If
> something has not been touched for 10 years this is an extremely
> strong indication that it is irrelevant. Things that are important
> tend to be done. Things that are not important do not get done. I
> know of no other measure for determining this.
I don't think that it help us forward if we nitpicking further about
different understanding if something is still relevant or obsolete.
The point is that Rob is correct to assume that if a 10 year old
issue/RFE is not yet addressed it will be likely not addressed in the
next 10 years if not a huge bunch of developers fall down of heaven.
The question is if we want to use the voting feature in the future if it
is useful to reset the current votes or at least review the current
issues with high votes and mark them as invalid/won't fix or whatever to
get a clean start point.
In general I would like to make use of the voting feature but with the
current state I am not sure if it make sense. Many issues that probably
nobody will fix in the near future.
For example issues with 2 votes of the same person are completely
irrelevant to me. The fall in the category of hey my issue is the most
important one, why don't you fix it. What is more important than my
issue ...
Juergen
>
> -Rob
>
>
>>
>> The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
>> well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
>> many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
>> forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
>>
>> The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
>> tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
>> there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
>> that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
>> feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
>>
>> Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
>>
>> Regards
>> Ricardo
>>
>>
>>
>>> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
>>> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
>>> years.
>>>
>>> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
>>> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
>>> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
>>> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
>>> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
>>> users actually think today.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>> Just my 2¢
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Ricardo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>> >>
>> >> > I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>> >> > seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>> >> > make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>> >>
>> >> Sounds fine for me.
>> >>
>> >> > The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>> >> > think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>> >> > untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>> >> > existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>> >> > whatever.
>> >>
>> >> No problem.
>> >>
>> >> > "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>> >>
>> >> Why?
>> >> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
>> to
>> >> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>> >>
>> >> > you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>> >> > many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>> >> > with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>> >>
>> >> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
>> to
>> >> make it transparent.
>> >>
>> >> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
>> it
>> >> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>> >> that's a good thing.
>> >>
>> >> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>> >> wishes of users.
>> >> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>> >> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>> >>
>> >
>> > +1.
>> >
>> > There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
>> you
>> > understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
>> > our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
>> > if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
>> > as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
>> should I
>> > fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>> >
>>
>> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
>> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
>> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
>> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
>> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
>> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>>
>> > If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
>> > survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
>> > requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
>> > respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>> >
>>
>> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
>> not relevant at all.
>
>
> The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
> unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
> provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
> solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
> more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. If you want to argue the
contrary you would need to explain what the relevance is of issues
that are 10-years old and have not been touched and probably never
will be. I might as well keep in a box my letters to Santa Claus from
when I was a child, in hopes that they may be someday delivered. If
something has not been touched for 10 years this is an extremely
strong indication that it is irrelevant. Things that are important
tend to be done. Things that are not important do not get done. I
know of no other measure for determining this.
-Rob
>
> The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
> well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
> many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
> forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
>
> The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
> tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
> there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
> that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
> feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
>
> Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
>
> Regards
> Ricardo
>
>
>
>> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
>> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
>> years.
>>
>> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
>> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
>> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
>> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
>> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
>> users actually think today.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Just my 2¢
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Ricardo
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2013/3/18 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> >>
> >> > I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
> >> > seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
> >> > make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
> >>
> >> Sounds fine for me.
> >>
> >> > The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
> >> > think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
> >> > untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
> >> > existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
> >> > whatever.
> >>
> >> No problem.
> >>
> >> > "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
> >>
> >> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me
> to
> >> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
> >>
> >> > you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
> >> > many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
> >> > with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
> >>
> >> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have
> to
> >> make it transparent.
> >>
> >> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because
> it
> >> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
> >> that's a good thing.
> >>
> >> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
> >> wishes of users.
> >> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
> >> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
> >>
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what
> you
> > understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
> > our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
> > if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
> > as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why
> should I
> > fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
> >
>
> They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
> the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
> today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
> priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
> votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
> today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
>
> > If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
> > survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
> > requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
> > respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
> >
>
> The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
> not relevant at all.
The fact that there are decade old issues only demonstrate they are still
unresolved: nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying the request to
provide support for opentype features is obsolete only because nobody
solved it since the issue was filled on 2003, and that we need to trash the
more than 200 votes for it? Sorry, but that makes no sense...
The lack of a split view is also a very old issue that's still relevant, as
well as the "reveal codes" mentioned by Dennis (even if I do not need it,
many people want it and every now and then someone ask for that on the
forums). Styles for tables? And for Math objects?... may I continue?
The point is that all the above mentioned request are really difficult
tasks, and that alone justify the fact they are still unresolved. Even if
there are requests that are not valid any more, and it's quite possible
that there are lots of such requests, dropping a nuke to kill user's
feedback on every single old issue is not a good thing to do, IMO.
Just my last 2¢ from today (taking a break from this thread)
Regards
Ricardo
> I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
> accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
> years.
>
> My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
> relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
> decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
> They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
> better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
> users actually think today.
>
> -Rob
>
> > Just my 2¢
> >
> > Regards
> > Ricardo
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:11 AM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>>
>> > I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
>> > seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
>> > make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>>
>> Sounds fine for me.
>>
>> > The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
>> > think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
>> > untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
>> > existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
>> > whatever.
>>
>> No problem.
>>
>> > "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>>
>> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>>
>> Why?
>> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me to
>> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>>
>> > you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
>> > many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
>> > with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>>
>> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have to
>> make it transparent.
>>
>> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because it
>> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
>> that's a good thing.
>>
>> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
>> wishes of users.
>> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
>> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>>
>
> +1.
>
> There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what you
> understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
> our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
> if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
> as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why should I
> fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
>
They'll believe what we tell them. If we say that we're "resetting"
the vote counts in order to determine what is most relevant to users
today, starting with an unbiased and fresh view of today's users
priorities, and not to over-advantage the dead hand of decade-old
votes from users who may or may not even still be using OpenOffice
today, then this will be seen as a good thing.
> If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
> survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
> requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
> respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
>
The fact that there are decade old issues demonstrates that they are
not relevant at all. I can't think of any test of irrelevancy more
accurate than pointing out that they have been ignored for over 10
years.
My suggestion was merely a way of getting feedback that might be more
relevant. But that's fine. If we're more comfortable claiming that
decade-old untouched issues are sacred to the project, then that's OK.
They can just as easily be ignored for another decade. We have
better means, like Google Moderator, or surveys, for finding out what
users actually think today.
-Rob
> Just my 2¢
>
> Regards
> Ricardo
>
>
>>
>>
>> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2013/3/18 Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>
> > I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
> > seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
> > make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
>
> Sounds fine for me.
>
> > The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
> > think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
> > untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
> > existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
> > whatever.
>
> No problem.
>
> > "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
>
> Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
>
> Why?
> If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me to
> know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
>
> > you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
> > many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
> > with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>
> I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have to
> make it transparent.
>
> For example, a road map for developing the program is important because it
> clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right,
> that's a good thing.
>
> But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature
> wishes of users.
> There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still
> clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
>
+1.
There is an old joke: "I'm only responsible for what I say not for what you
understand", but the fact is that being AOO an end user application what
our users understand IS important for us. And what will people understand
if they know all those votes are being deleted? IMO, users will take this
as "they do not care about our votes, why should I vote again? Why should I
fill a bug report that nobody reads?" and that's a really bad thing.
If you want to know how relevant old issues are, once we have a working
survey system we can start a series of surveys about most wanted features
requests. IMO, the only valid way to delete votes, the only way that show
respect to our users is to close the corresponding issues.
Just my 2¢
Regards
Ricardo
>
>
> Greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
> seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
> make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
Sounds fine for me.
> The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
> think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
> untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
> existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
> whatever.
No problem.
> "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing.
Yes, but what we must be as clearly defined this user can foresee it.
Why?
If I as a user know any bug in the program, it may be important for me to know _approximately_ when this will be fixed.
> you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
> many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
> with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
I do not know how to define something should, but I know that you have to make it transparent.
For example, a road map for developing the program is important because it clarifies what new features AOO will have in the future. That's right, that's a good thing.
But it is also important to clarify how to deal with bugs and feature wishes of users.
There was the suggestion to delete all old votes, only we must still clarify how we handle new votes. I think.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>> A promise to do what?
>
> The opinion of the user to be taken seriously because you have asked him to speak his mind.
>
>> But a feature request?
>
> This is an opinion of our users. It should be important to us.
>
>> I see zero obligation, legal, [...], social,
>> or otherwise, for us to do anything other than say, "Thank you for the
>> suggestion".
>
> Yes, this is formally correct, but you do not notice it much here depends on the tone of voice?
>
> ("the tone of voice" --> in german i mean: es kommt auf den Tonfall an mit dem wir öffentlich etwas sagen)
>
>> moral
>
> I think so.
> It's about respect for what we bring to our users, because it is a fundamental difference between what we need to do and what we should do so voluntarily.
>
The title of the tread is "A question about existing practices". I
think the facts are quite clear. If we have many 10 year old
untouched BZ issues then fixing these issues is not part of our
existing practice, whether you define that as mandatory, voluntary or
whatever. "Practice" is what we do, not what we talk about doing. If
you want to argue that we talk a lot about fixing old issues, and say
many solemn things about how important they are, then I would agree
with you 100%. But we don't actually do anything about them.
>> > It is not the problem of the user in evaluating old Votes
>> Votes unlike new, because we have no contract with the user,
>> but it's about credibility, our credibility.
>> >
>>
>> We need to set the right expectations. If we set expectations that we
>> are all supermen and can write C++ code in our sleep, and our cats can
>> write Java code while playing with balls of yarn, then yes we will
>> lose credibility. But a different kind of credibility is the kind
>> that attracts developers, which is saying that developers on the
>> project work on the features that are important to them, and the
>> direction of the project is determined by the collective priorities of
>> those who are doing the actual work. That kind of credibility is a
>> very important kind, since that is what helps us recruit developers.
>
> Once again: this is not controversial.
>
> Dispute seems to me that we should find right words to our users if we justify that.
>
I'd say, "Thanks for the suggestion. We take all suggestions
seriously, and user suggestions are often the source of ideas that
make it into the product. Thank you for using AOO."
> There is (imho) a great difference whether we say we can not, or whether we say the user would have no right.
>
> An example of what I mean:
> If I had a business and sell something, it may be I've just not all at the warehouse thing a customer, the customer then I will _ask for understanding_, but I will _not tell him he had no right_ to buy a certain product immediately .
>
> In AOO we do not sell product, but we are still committed to our credibility, and even a little for the credibility of free software.
>
> This is my opinion.
>
>> Of course, if we don't make a product that users want, then we become
>> irrelevant.
>
> Yes, that's the point.
>
>> But a look at our popularity via download numbers shows
>> that we are highly relevant,
>
> And how do we evaluate, for example, that one of the biggest public users of OpenOffice, the city of Munich, has declared to want to switch to LibreOffice?
> (see: http://www.it-muenchen-blog.de/2012/10/libre-office-fur-munchen/)
>
> This is (imho) a big loss for AOO.
>
But I hope you would agree that what we did or did not do to 10-year
old Bugzilla issues was irrelevant to their decision.
-Rob
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> A promise to do what?
The opinion of the user to be taken seriously because you have asked him to speak his mind.
> But a feature request?
This is an opinion of our users. It should be important to us.
> I see zero obligation, legal, [...], social,
> or otherwise, for us to do anything other than say, "Thank you for the
> suggestion".
Yes, this is formally correct, but you do not notice it much here depends on the tone of voice?
("the tone of voice" --> in german i mean: es kommt auf den Tonfall an mit dem wir öffentlich etwas sagen)
> moral
I think so.
It's about respect for what we bring to our users, because it is a fundamental difference between what we need to do and what we should do so voluntarily.
> > It is not the problem of the user in evaluating old Votes
> Votes unlike new, because we have no contract with the user,
> but it's about credibility, our credibility.
> >
>
> We need to set the right expectations. If we set expectations that we
> are all supermen and can write C++ code in our sleep, and our cats can
> write Java code while playing with balls of yarn, then yes we will
> lose credibility. But a different kind of credibility is the kind
> that attracts developers, which is saying that developers on the
> project work on the features that are important to them, and the
> direction of the project is determined by the collective priorities of
> those who are doing the actual work. That kind of credibility is a
> very important kind, since that is what helps us recruit developers.
Once again: this is not controversial.
Dispute seems to me that we should find right words to our users if we justify that.
There is (imho) a great difference whether we say we can not, or whether we say the user would have no right.
An example of what I mean:
If I had a business and sell something, it may be I've just not all at the warehouse thing a customer, the customer then I will _ask for understanding_, but I will _not tell him he had no right_ to buy a certain product immediately .
In AOO we do not sell product, but we are still committed to our credibility, and even a little for the credibility of free software.
This is my opinion.
> Of course, if we don't make a product that users want, then we become
> irrelevant.
Yes, that's the point.
> But a look at our popularity via download numbers shows
> that we are highly relevant,
And how do we evaluate, for example, that one of the biggest public users of OpenOffice, the city of Munich, has declared to want to switch to LibreOffice?
(see: http://www.it-muenchen-blog.de/2012/10/libre-office-fur-munchen/)
This is (imho) a big loss for AOO.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann [mailto:orwittmann@googlemail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 11:41 AM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: A question about existing practices
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> sorry, for top-posting, but I have a general remark.
>>
>> From my point of view the discussion on this thread went
>> into the wrong
>> direction.
>> I think Jörg just mentioned issue 3959 as an _example_ for
>> feedback from
>> users regarding feature requests via Bugzilla votes. I also
>> think that
>> Jörg mentioned Bugzilla votes also only as an _example_ for
>> such kind of
>> user feedback.
>
> Exactly.
>
> What is important for me to say that when we make promise users (directly or indirectly) so we have to deliver.
>
> A vote button is an indirect promise (because why the user should vote, except that it has the relevance).
A promise to do what? I think the existing practice is rather
unambiguous. If we have 10 year old issues with high vote counts,
that means that the project never treated votes as a promise to
implement the requests.
> Likewise, it is a promise that we BZ ever offer, because if we ask users to tell us problems, we are also obliged to take care of their communications. (not legally, but morally)
>
If a use has a problem with an existing feature, where it is not
working as it was designed to work, or intended to work, then yes, we
should help the user. If there is a bug, then we should fix the bug.
Of course, with many defect reports we'll naturally focus on the most
severe ones. And in practice this means that there may be some
trivial bugs that never get fixed.
But a feature request? I see zero obligation, legal, moral, social,
or otherwise, for us to do anything other than say, "Thank you for the
suggestion".
> It is not the problem of the user in evaluating old Votes Votes unlike new, because we have no contract with the user, but it's about credibility, our credibility.
>
We need to set the right expectations. If we set expectations that we
are all supermen and can write C++ code in our sleep, and our cats can
write Java code while playing with balls of yarn, then yes we will
lose credibility. But a different kind of credibility is the kind
that attracts developers, which is saying that developers on the
project work on the features that are important to them, and the
direction of the project is determined by the collective priorities of
those who are doing the actual work. That kind of credibility is a
very important kind, since that is what helps us recruit developers.
Of course, if we don't make a product that users want, then we become
irrelevant. But a look at our popularity via download numbers shows
that we are highly relevant, even though some 10-year old feature
ideas are ignored.
In any case, "volunteers" and "obligations" do not match. If we
really want to lose volunteers then we should tell them that they have
the obligation to follow the priorities of 10 year old votes.
-Rob
>
> 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: A question about existing practices
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann [mailto:orwittmann@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 11:41 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A question about existing practices
>
> Hi,
>
> sorry, for top-posting, but I have a general remark.
>
> From my point of view the discussion on this thread went
> into the wrong
> direction.
> I think Jörg just mentioned issue 3959 as an _example_ for
> feedback from
> users regarding feature requests via Bugzilla votes. I also
> think that
> Jörg mentioned Bugzilla votes also only as an _example_ for
> such kind of
> user feedback.
Exactly.
What is important for me to say that when we make promise users (directly or indirectly) so we have to deliver.
A vote button is an indirect promise (because why the user should vote, except that it has the relevance).
Likewise, it is a promise that we BZ ever offer, because if we ask users to tell us problems, we are also obliged to take care of their communications. (not legally, but morally)
It is not the problem of the user in evaluating old Votes Votes unlike new, because we have no contract with the user, but it's about credibility, our credibility.
Greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A question about existing practices
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
sorry, for top-posting, but I have a general remark.
From my point of view the discussion on this thread went into the wrong
direction.
I think Jörg just mentioned issue 3959 as an _example_ for feedback from
users regarding feature requests via Bugzilla votes. I also think that
Jörg mentioned Bugzilla votes also only as an _example_ for such kind of
user feedback.
My perspective on Jörg's intention for starting this thread is to
discuss the following questions:
- How should we handle feedback from users regarding feature requests?
- Should we define/establish one or more processes for users to provide
their feedback for feature requests?
- If the users' feedback reflects their demands and if we think we
should take these demands seriously, how can we support/show ways that
these demands are fullfilled?
Thus, in my opinion we should not stress the one or the other issue or
the Bugzilla voting system. We should more discuss the general issue
regarding the users' feedback regarding feature requests to our product
and how we want to react on it.
Best regards, Oliver.
On 14.03.2013 09:56, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> By a request in the forum
> (http://de.openoffice.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=61365), I get the
> information, the Issue #3959 was not implemented since 2002, although
> he has already received 355 votes.
>
> (Note: the implementation of the issues is not particularly important
> to me, I personally have not even voted for it.)
>
> I know it, earlier in OpenOffice, org, not practice was unfortunately
> votes cast for issues as direct, binding standard for their
> implementation to consider, But how is that today?.
>
> It is clear to me the AOO is created by volunteers who choose their
> detailed tasks themselves, but should we not also be a concern comply
> with the interests of the users of AOO? That would not only be of
> practical benefit to users, but would also enhance the reputation of
> AOO, as in the practice oriented project.
>
> Why the latter is important? I think because of the positive
> reputation of AOO in public grow the number of our supporters
> (sponsors, supporters, developers) will be.
>
> My view: We should not emulate LibreOffice because LibreOffice may be
> innovative, but public statements about quality and consistency of
> LibreOffice are devastating. For example, the chairman of the FroDeV
> spoke (a German association for the promotion of free software) this
> publicly recently plain text, see:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.discuss.german/13802
>
>
(Sorry only in German)
>
>
>
> My questions are:
>
> Are there any agreements which result to have the number of votes for
> an issue? Is there some agreement that a high number of votes to be
> reason, the implementation of Issues to be considered as a priority?
>
> What is your basic view on this?
>
>
> 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