[ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Thorsten Behrens Thorsten Behrens
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

Hi *,

QA found a number of problems that were initially addressed via a
hotfix for the Linux packages, but then resulted in a fully new build
today - we're now uploading builds of LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 to a
public (but non-mirrored - so don't spread news too widely!) place, as
soon as they're available. Grab them here:

 http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/

If you've a bit of time, please give them a try & report *critical*
bugs, especially regressions relative to prior RCs here, so we can
incorporate them into the release notes. Please note that it takes
approximately 24 hours to populate the mirrors, so that's about the
time we have to collect feedback.

The list of fixed bugs vs. 4.1.0 RC3 is available here

 http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugs-libreoffice-4-1-0-release-4.1.0.4.log

I'd like to especially ask QA volunteers from the following locales,
to please verify the fix of fdo#67093:

  as
  bg
  br
  gl
  lt
  pt-BR
  pt
  ru
  sv
  te
  uk
  zh-CN
  zh-TW

Thanks a lot for your help,

-- Thorsten

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Mateusz Zasuwik Mateusz Zasuwik
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

And it explain why we must wait so long for new release. In this place
I would like to thank people who let me open old Mac Word files from
1992 (I don't have even one) and people who threw out libsqlite3.so
from Linux build what is reason for not opening encrypted files. All
along I am thinking what kind of priorities we have.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
David Tardon David Tardon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:21:56AM +0200, Mateusz Zasuwik wrote:
> And it explain why we must wait so long for new release.

Huh? It only delayed the release by a couple of days.

> In this place
> I would like to thank people who let me open old Mac Word files from
> 1992 (I don't have even one)

If you are trying to imply that this somehow affected the work on other
things, you are wrong. The author of the filter is not active in
LibreOffice and integration of it has been relatively simple work.

(Btw, I have never created an encrypted file yet... Do you see where
that kind of attitude is heading?)

> and people who threw out libsqlite3.so
> from Linux build

That has been a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes. Your tone implies that
we have done it deliberately to thwart you.

> what is reason for not opening encrypted files.

You reported a bug for that 2(!) months ago. That means you have known
about the issue all that time and done nothing to make it more visible
to us. So stop bitching now. (Btw, it took me 15 minutes to find the
cause and 30 seconds to fix it.)

> All
> along I am thinking what kind of priorities we have.

As one of our valued developers has said: "We don't make plans. We do
things."

D.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Mateusz Zasuwik Mateusz Zasuwik
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

2013/7/24 David Tardon <[hidden email]>:

> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:21:56AM +0200, Mateusz Zasuwik wrote:
>> And it explain why we must wait so long for new release.
>
> Huh? It only delayed the release by a couple of days.
>
>> In this place
>> I would like to thank people who let me open old Mac Word files from
>> 1992 (I don't have even one)
>
> If you are trying to imply that this somehow affected the work on other
> things, you are wrong. The author of the filter is not active in
> LibreOffice and integration of it has been relatively simple work.
>
> (Btw, I have never created an encrypted file yet... Do you see where
> that kind of attitude is heading?)

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!
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.

> You reported a bug for that 2(!) months ago. That means you have known
> about the issue all that time and done nothing to make it more visible
> to us. So stop bitching now. (Btw, it took me 15 minutes to find the
> cause and 30 seconds to fix it.)

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
money". 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
luck. Under Leif Lodahl's blog post (
http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2013/07/libreoffice-is-becoming-swiss-army.html
) someone pointed out that TDF supports dead formats but doesn't care
for StarOffice formats which are still in usage. 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.

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.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Petr Mladek Petr Mladek
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

Mateusz Zasuwik píše v St 24. 07. 2013 v 12:44 +0200:
> 2013/7/24 David Tardon <[hidden email]>:
> 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
       https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Most_Annoying_Bugs
     + it is suggested to add an expert into CC, see
       https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FindTheExpert


> 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
> money".

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
> luck.

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 (
> http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2013/07/libreoffice-is-becoming-swiss-army.html
> ) 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
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#4.1_release

Best Regards,
Petr

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Norbert Thiebaud Norbert Thiebaud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

In reply to this post by Mateusz Zasuwik
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Mateusz Zasuwik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 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!

And notheless someone bothered to work at it, produce some code,
tested it and integrated it... and in a way that does not make the
world a masive pain for the rest of the dev, like binfilter was.

In open source things do not happen because pleanty of persons 'want'
something, but because at least one person _does_ something.

> 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.

At least someone needed it... otherwise that person would not have
written it to start with.

>
> More visible? Apart from this, I asked people on IRC channel
> (libreoffice-dev) to glance at this issue.
[...]
"Second one: "yeah! ask them (developers) to give you back your
> money".

can you pin point the approximate date.. I have a fairly complete log,
but I cannot find such exchange in libreoffice-dev
That is generally not the tone in libreoffice-dev... especially not
out of the blue...

>
> 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.

No, they will have to wait until 4.1.1, which is what... 3 weeks from now?

Norbert
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Tor Lillqvist-2 Tor Lillqvist-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

>> "yeah! ask them (developers) to give you back your
>> money".

>I have a fairly complete log, but I cannot find such exchange in libreoffice-dev

That sounds exactly as something I would say, so I can volunteer as the culprit here! What do I win, a ban from the channel?

--tml
 

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Norbert Thiebaud Norbert Thiebaud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Tor Lillqvist <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> "yeah! ask them (developers) to give you back your
>> >> money".
>>
>> >I have a fairly complete log, but I cannot find such exchange in
>> > libreoffice-dev
>
>
> That sounds exactly as something I would say, so I can volunteer as the
> culprit here! What do I win, a ban from the channel?

What good would that do ?
I was just wondering about the context... based on the tone of the
email, I'd imagine that if the IRC intervention was alike, that could
very well explain the 'responded-in-kind' answer.

Norbert
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Michael Meeks-2 Michael Meeks-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

In reply to this post by Petr Mladek

On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 14:25 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Yes, encrypted ODF is important and should work. On the other, we did
> not break it by purpose.

        Any volunteers for writing a unit test for that ? :-) then we can be
reasonably sure it will never break again.

        ATB,

                Michael.

--
[hidden email]  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Mateusz Zasuwik Mateusz Zasuwik
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

In reply to this post by Norbert Thiebaud
@David Tardon
You have absolutely right. Sorry for my rude behaviour and thanks for
enlighten me.

@Petr Mladek

I never blamed Joel. It's not his paid job so he could just do
nothing. I also never found that someone broke LO on purpose. I just
disagree with sentence that *I do nothing to make this bug report more
visible*. Thanks for your patience but David clarify me that opening
encrypted files is not elementary functionality.

And please take on board fact that user doesn't distinguish paid
developer from volunteer-developer.

@Norbert Thiebaud

Actually that is "obvious" that those people were provoked by me. I
wanted ask what is aim your question but now I see the point is
looking me up and down. So check your inbox. You find there exact date
and nicks.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Alex Waite Alex Waite
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] [ANN] LibreOffice 4.1.0 RC4 test builds available for smoketesting

In reply to this post by Mateusz Zasuwik
I just hopped on here to provide my 2 cents.

First of all, Mateusz, I don't know if you intend to come across
aggressively, but your writing tone is /very/ harsh and makes it
difficult for readers to not feel attacked.

> 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!
> 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.

Going off the assumption that the tone is just a misunderstanding, and
that you're actually productively discussing these points, I'd like to
go on record that adding support to these formats is a *huge* bonus for
me. I have clients who have data locked up in these formats, and this
feature has liberated that data. In 2013, it's a bit difficult to find a
copy of Mac OS 7 to run the programs needed to open these files (and
then export to what other ancient format that has modern-ish support?)
LibreOffice supporting these formats solves *all* of that for me.

> 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.

Here's another tone issue. The man just fixed a bug for you, and you
come across as berating him. First of all, thank him. Secondly, there
are minor releases (4.1.1) that will be released in less than half a
year. Thirdly, you can always run daily builds of you're so inclined.

I appreciate you engaging with people and taking the time to post to the
mailing list. You obviously have a lot of energy and passion for this
software, which is something I always like to see.

I strongly encourage you to engage and help out with the LibreOffice;
putting that energy to good use.

I look forward to seeing your forthcoming contributions!

---Alex

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice