[libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting
pmladek at suse.cz
Wed Jul 24 05:25:36 PDT 2013
Mateusz Zasuwik píše v St 24. 07. 2013 v 12:44 +0200:
> 2013/7/24 David Tardon <dtardon at redhat.com>:
> The only thing I imply is that new major release is enhanced by
> useless formats. These files are dead, they come from dead software
> and in bugzilla system you won't find even one bugreport relevant to!
One thing here is that most developers are volunteers that do the work
in their free time. Many of them are bug fixing or implementing feature
requests from bugzilla. But there are also people that are interested
only into a particular area and want to make it better in LO. We could
motivate them to work in other areas but we could not force them. Should
we refuse their work just because their area of interest has less users
than the other areas?
> Linux is alive platform and encrypted ODF files are in common usage.
> It would be great if elementary functionality just works instead of
> adding features no one needed.
Yes, encrypted ODF is important and should work. On the other, we did
not break it by purpose. Any fix or improvement could potentially break
other things. There are many automatic tests but they do not test
everything. We relay on real life testing and reporting bugs.
You reported the bug and was active. Unfortunately, it was not treated
ideally. It was twice wrongly closed as fixed. There was several times
mentioned that it worked for someone. Nobody added any developer into
CC. The priority was the default; severity was only "major". There are
currently 1056 open bugs with this or higher severity, so it is quite
deep in the swamp.
If a bug is critical:
+ the severity should be set to critical
+ if it affects many people, it should be added to MABs, see
+ it is suggested to add an expert into CC, see
> More visible? Apart from this, I asked people on IRC channel
> (libreoffice-dev) to glance at this issue. I got 2 answers: "Calm dam.
> You reported this bug a few days ago, and developers still have much
> time!". Second one: "yeah! ask them (developers) to give you back your
I am sorry to read that there were such reactions. Well, your initial
mail used quite offending style. Unfortunately, we are just humans and
it often brings offending reaction :-(
> Later I tried to interest Joel Madero but he wrote back he has
> freedom of choose and he is not interested this bugreport. My bad
Joel does great job but he probably did a mistake here. He wrote at
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64916#c8 that it worked for
him. I guess that he tested wrong build or so. Anyway, it is
undestandable that if he thought that it was invalid bug and he did not
want to spent more time on it.
> Under Leif Lodahl's blog post (
> ) someone pointed out that TDF supports dead formats but doesn't care
> for StarOffice formats which are still in usage.
The support for StarOffice file formats was removed because it was huge
piece of complex code (reduced copy of OOo-1.1 sources). The stuff was
hard to maintain, build, and distribute.
In contrary, the source code for the other formats is much easier,
cleaner, and actively maintained.
For me it is hard to judge how many files are spread all over the world
in the StarOffice and the other "dead" formats.
> I made my comment
> about lack of support for encrypted ODF files. And you know what? This
> comment was blocked and never published. So don't tell me I am do
> nothing (referring to your post on fdo) because for this period I was
> treated only like intruder.
I see one your comment there. I can't speak for Leif and do not know why
the other was blocked.
> You fix it in 15 minutes? Great! So now many people can just wait next
> half of year to 4.2 release. Thanks a lot for attention.
I am pretty sure that it will be in 4.1.1 bugfix release that we be
available one month after 4.1.0 release, see
More information about the LibreOffice