[Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal
bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Thu Mar 22 03:33:55 PDT 2012
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:04:51AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> That is already perfectly clear -- as you know we already have a bug for that
> -- and thus need no repeating. But punching the codeconductor devs for not
> having your pet feature in a prerelease of their free (as in free beer and as
> in free speech) product is absolutely not. Complaining does not help us one bit
> here, getting a web developer from your friends interested in implementing this
> is (hint, hint ;) )!
Sorry, if that sounds to harsh, but reality sometimes is. Indeed, we might also
consider to use some funds on topics like this, but for example in this case,
we need to really know if Caseconductor is suitable at all for what we do (see
my comments). So if you cant dig out a warm body implementing OpenID for
Litmus/Caseconductor/Bugzilla (which admittedly isnt easy), the next best thing
is finding out if the hope put into caseconductor is justified, or if it is
doing too much/is too confusing for us. So: Are you maybe interested in having
a good look at:
and compare it seriously with what we have at:
because we obviously need to know that before throwing money in that direction?
That would be an awesome, constructive contribution.
More information about the Libreoffice-qa