<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Print Preview crashes on signed document" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117039#c5">Comment # 5</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Print Preview crashes on signed document" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117039">bug 117039</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:Katarina.Behrens@cib.de" title="Katarina Behrens (CIB) <Katarina.Behrens@cib.de>"> Katarina Behrens (CIB)</a> <pre> > May I note that as long time LibO users (starting from OO2.4) we a getting a > bit worried about changes being made in areas of code that have worked well > for a very long period, apparently without sufficient testing? Dude, I totally understand that the fact software has bugs is sometimes frustrating AF. But saying that something has been implemented "apparently without sufficient testing" and not having much of a clue how much testing is really happening [1] is not going to win you many friends. It's also not going to motivate people to swiftly deal with your bugreports although it might be tempting to believe otherwise. No amount of testing ever is going to find all bugs and we all have to live with it. [1] unit tests, API tests, UI tests, continuous integration running those tests 50+ times a day, crashtesting, fuzzing, army of QA people testing dailies, dedicated QA person paid by TDF, peer code review.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>