<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body><a class="email" href="mailto:todventtu@suomi24.fi" title="Buovjaga <todventtu@suomi24.fi>"> Buovjaga</a> changed <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Read-only bar is unreadable when using dark theme" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103656">bug 103656</a> <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8"> <tr> <th>What</th> <th>Removed</th> <th>Added</th> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:right;">Status</td> <td>UNCONFIRMED </td> <td>NEW </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:right;">Ever confirmed</td> <td> </td> <td>1 </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:right;">Severity</td> <td>normal </td> <td>minor </td> </tr></table> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Read-only bar is unreadable when using dark theme" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103656#c8">Comment # 8</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Read-only bar is unreadable when using dark theme" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103656">bug 103656</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:todventtu@suomi24.fi" title="Buovjaga <todventtu@suomi24.fi>"> Buovjaga</a> <pre>I launched a VM with GNOME and changed the theme to a dark one and I confirm the problem. Version: 5.3.4.2 Build ID: 5.3.4-1 CPU Threads: 1; OS Version: Linux 4.11; UI Render: default; VCL: gtk3; Layout Engine: new; Locale: fi-FI (fi_FI.UTF-8); Calc: group (In reply to Rimas Kudelis from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103656#c6">comment #6</a>) > I'm making it sound like you're supposed to care a bit more than a casual > user like me, since *you* are a member of the QA team, not me. Quit trying to build walls. I can't believe you are writing such absurd statements. (In reply to Rimas Kudelis from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103656#c6">comment #6</a>) > I know quite well what open source is, but this mentality within LibreOffice > QA team of some idealistic QA process being above everything else has > annoyed me more than once already. There is nothing idealistic about it. It is very realistic. The point is that scarce developer resources need to be focused on investigating known bugs. Even with this system of independent confirmation, developers are regularly having to close reports due to some misunderstanding or whatever and thus wasting their time. (In reply to Rimas Kudelis from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103656#c6">comment #6</a>) > I mean, if I wouldn't burst out like this, you (the LibreOffice QA and > developers) would probably just ignore this bug until 4.4 is released, then > ask me to confirm that the issue is still there, then ignore it again, then > ask me to confirm that it's still there in 5.0, and so on and so forth. What > is that supposed to tell me? On the contrary, you are not helping yourself, but making it harder as no one wants to help a person with such a disgusting attitude. People reading your comments will whip out their shitlists and write "note: never help this Rimas guy". (In reply to Rimas Kudelis from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103656#c6">comment #6</a>) > If you don't think a particular bug deserves attention (low traffic, etc.), > that's fine. But what's the point of asking submitters to re-test their bugs > with each new release, if these bugs hadn't even been worked on? You are twisting things around and assuming motives. Apparently it did not occur to you that only a minority of testers at any given point in time will be running GNOME desktops. The point of asking for a re-test is that we are seeing 20-30% WORKSFORME closing rates for mass re-test requests for bugs older than 1 year. We don't do it to annoy reporters, but because there is a real chance something is working in a newer release.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>