<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [META] - Feature "not implemented on platform X"" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129806">bug 129806</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:mikekaganski@hotmail.com" title="Mike Kaganski <mikekaganski@hotmail.com>"> Mike Kaganski</a> <pre>(In reply to Olivier Hallot from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=129806#c2">comment #2</a>) > The point in adding to the Help is the maintenance work to keep contents > precise and updated. > > Suppose that the issue on WIN/ssh is fixed someday. Who will pick the right > Help pages and correct its contents? Or, how to let Help maintainers know > the issue is fixed/implemented/whatever? It seems hard to me to traverse > Help pages checking for bugs fixed or new features. The same is true for anything: imagine we have help pages for, say, print dialog; and then GSoC suddenly introduced a new version of the dialog. What would be the difference in this case? I see tremendous progress in our help in recent years thanks to your brilliant work. In AskLibO, I always post links to the related help pages when I know them. And you know what: I see increasing number of such links from others; and direct comments like "the help system is really useful" (I need to have a habit to notify you of such things). It's only possible because help becomes relevant. This request is another way of *helping* users, which is the point of help, isn't it?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>