Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
CVAlkan CVAlkan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Ran across this today: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/why-would-my-columns-in-libreoffice-separate-as-zoom-out-and-overlap-as-zoom-in-4175531965/

It includes the quote "I know LO often acts like an annoying hysterical wife -- lacking every logic and reacting is every way except the expected way. But it seems like you seriously think LO is reacting on your input, or that you have a computer hardware failure setting the bits just so as to cause this behaviour."

Another interesting quote: "Since you are running Mint 17.1 I assume LO is fairly up-to-date, meaning in a very unstable development state. I found that LO is bug ridden, and especially contains lot of regression errors in the most simple things."

That last bit, although hitting close to home, seems awfully dismissive when appearing on a non-Libre forum, and certainly doesn't help TDF promotion efforts - should someone knowledgeable about the particular problem the posting author describes take a look? I personally haven't experienced the issues he (or she?) describes, so don't feel qualified to act as a diplomat ...
Charles-H. Schulz Charles-H. Schulz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Hello,

Le dimanche 25 janvier 2015 à 07:12 -0700, CVAlkan a écrit :

> Ran across this today:
> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/why-would-my-columns-in-libreoffice-separate-as-zoom-out-and-overlap-as-zoom-in-4175531965/
>
> It includes the quote "I know LO often acts like an annoying hysterical wife
> -- lacking every logic and reacting is every way except the expected way.
> But it seems like you seriously think LO is reacting on your input, or that
> you have a computer hardware failure setting the bits just so as to cause
> this behaviour."
>
> Another interesting quote: "Since you are running Mint 17.1 I assume LO is
> fairly up-to-date, meaning in a very unstable development state. I found
> that LO is bug ridden, and especially contains lot of regression errors in
> the most simple things."
>
> That last bit, although hitting close to home, seems awfully dismissive when
> appearing on a non-Libre forum, and certainly doesn't help TDF promotion
> efforts - should someone knowledgeable about the particular problem the
> posting author describes take a look? I personally haven't experienced the
> issues he (or she?) describes, so don't feel qualified to act as a diplomat

Ideally people could engage in a discussion with the original poster(s)
but as it is a non LibreOffice forum, I guess everyone is entitled to
his or her own opinion, no matter how dismissive it its. I would say it
is not primarily up to TDF to answer, but of course understanding this
person's issue and help him out, perhaps by having him file a bug report
may be useful.

On a personal note, I'm more upset by his comment on the "annoying wife"
than on his criticizing of LibreOffice. I'm a married man but I feel
somewhat offended by the comparison.

Cheers,

--
Charles-H. Schulz
Co-founder, The Document Foundation,
Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
Mobile Number: +33 (0)6 98 65 54 24.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
CVAlkan CVAlkan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Hi Charles:

It's all a matter of perspective I suppose.

I initially interpreted the poster's remarks as tongue-in-cheek humor, that is to say something like "I love her (LibreOffice) and really don't want to be separated from her, but sometimes she (Writer & Impress particularly) gets on my nerves."

After re-reading the post, however, the word "hysterical" makes me think your interpretation might be closer to the mark.

But, after all, they (I'm not sure precisely who "they" is) say there's no such thing as bad publicity ...

I just wanted to point out that there are some folks out there talking about us behind our backs :(

Frank
Spencer Graves-2 Spencer Graves-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org


> On Jan 25, 2015, at 9:58 AM, CVAlkan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Charles:
>
> It's all a matter of perspective I suppose.
>
> I initially interpreted the poster's remarks as tongue-in-cheek humor, that
> is to say something like "I love her (LibreOffice) and really don't want to
> be separated from her, but sometimes she (Writer & Impress particularly)
> gets on my nerves."
>
> After re-reading the post, however, the word "hysterical" makes me think
> your interpretation might be closer to the mark.
>
> But, after all, they (I'm not sure precisely who "they" is) say there's no
> such thing as bad publicity ...
>
> I just wanted to point out that there are some folks out there talking about
> us behind our backs :(


          Microsoft’s future profitability depends in part on the perceived superiority of their product over LibreOffice.  As the LibreOffice market share increases, we can expect more disinformation like that.  


          Spencer

>
> Frank
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interesting-comment-about-Writer-Bugs-in-LinuxQuestions-org-tp4137415p4137466.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
CVAlkan CVAlkan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Hi Spenser:

What you're saying is certainly true, but in this case it really didn't sound like it was "pro-Microsoft" but rather "anti-LO" - a subtle difference perhaps, but I believe a significant one.

The real danger, I suspect, is that, knowing we're gaining on the proprietary world, we tend to automatically discount some of the comments that are put out assuming they are "sour grapes" or marketing misinformation. In particular, however, the one responder's comment: "contains lot of regression errors in the most simple things" (I'm assuming the writer means "basic" as opposed to "simple") is really not that difficult to justify over the course of the 4.x releases, and not recognizing that will not result in the continued progress I think we all want. Even realizing that the 4.x series represents a major step forward in lots of ways, there are quite a surprising number of things that seem to have been "broken" along the path to cleaning and enhancing the code.

I realize that "quite a surprising number of things" is a little vague, so I'll mention that one piddly insignificant user alone who isn't in any way involved in development or testing (that would be me) has filed several bugs that can be looked up: e.g. 74056, 86578, 88208, and all of these were for things that I recall successfully using in the past. And it isn't hard to locate other new bugs related to indexing, printing, table formatting and so forth that others have filed. Whether these bugs were introduced due to over-enthusiastic coding, "cowboy coding" (as we used to call it, a flawed integration process, lack of testing, lack of code reviews, and so forth is, of course, not for me to say. And, I'm using the phrase "lack of testing" to include an amateurish reliance on simple "does it work?" testing as opposed to doing "real" testing, which can be summed up as "does everything else still work?" (that's why good testers are a phenomenally underrated bunch!)

I suspect that's one of the difficulties inherent in this sort of development environment: the work is more or less voluntary; developing code is fun and results in creative satisfaction (positive feedback); rigorous testing for most is not (the best result is neutral and often seems or is viewed as unproductive).

One other thing to realize is that the comments I pointed to seem to be specific to Writer, which is where the current threat to the proprietary world lies (so far as I can tell, Calc has already reached sufficient parity with Excel for most typical users) and where the naysayers you refer to are taking their current stand.

But, sadly, other modules (particularly Impress) suffer from too much attention to cool new features (some of which are admittedly nice), and insufficient attention to serious flaws in fundamental functionality, like remaining on the same slide when you switch views, handling of tables, and so forth.

I'll reiterate the purpose of my post, though: I just thought folks should be aware of these sorts of postings, since only LibreOffice users (and not potential ones) are likely to be on this particular forum (hence - we're preaching to the choir as they say). If a major multiple operating system forum has this sort of posting that goes unchallenged, that's another matter entirely; my thought was that even a public offer of help - specific questions and so forth - would be a positive counter-balance.

Frank
Spencer Graves-2 Spencer Graves-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Hi, Frank:  


          Thanks for your clarification.  I agree on nearly all counts.  


          What do LO developers do regarding unit testing — automated tests to confirm that certain features continue to work?  I contribute to another free open-source software (FOSS) project (r-project.org <http://r-project.org/>), where “trustworthy software” is ensured (when it is) by a process of developing test suites and documentation in parallel with the code.  Ideally, we’d like to have 100% coverage of all documented features.  Then any fix of one bug that broke something else would be flagged in the next test cycle.  However, this is (as you say) a volunteer project, and the coverage is never 100%.  I don’t take the time to write tests for every feature, but when new bugs are reported, I add tests for those before I actually fix them.  And some organizations pay people full time to support FOSS projects.  (I’ve heard that Google supports Linux to ensure that they get features and bug fixes they want.  LO would be better if more large organizations make similar investments in LO.)


          Best Wishes
          Spencer


> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:30 PM, CVAlkan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Spenser:
>
> What you're saying is certainly true, but in this case it really didn't
> sound like it was "pro-Microsoft" but rather "anti-LO" - a subtle difference
> perhaps, but I believe a significant one.
>
> The real danger, I suspect, is that, knowing we're gaining on the
> proprietary world, we tend to automatically discount some of the comments
> that are put out assuming they are "sour grapes" or marketing
> misinformation. In particular, however, the one responder's comment:
> "contains lot of regression errors in the most simple things" (I'm assuming
> the writer means "basic" as opposed to "simple") is really not that
> difficult to justify over the course of the 4.x releases, and not
> recognizing that will not result in the continued progress I think we all
> want. Even realizing that the 4.x series represents a major step forward in
> lots of ways, there are quite a surprising number of things that seem to
> have been "broken" along the path to cleaning and enhancing the code.
>
> I realize that "quite a surprising number of things" is a little vague, so
> I'll mention that one piddly insignificant user alone who isn't in any way
> involved in development or testing (that would be me) has filed several bugs
> that can be looked up: e.g. 74056, 86578, 88208, and all of these were for
> things that I recall successfully using in the past. And it isn't hard to
> locate other new bugs related to indexing, printing, table formatting and so
> forth that others have filed. Whether these bugs were introduced due to
> over-enthusiastic coding, "cowboy coding" (as we used to call it, a flawed
> integration process, lack of testing, lack of code reviews, and so forth is,
> of course, not for me to say. And, I'm using the phrase "lack of testing" to
> include an amateurish reliance on simple "does it work?" testing as opposed
> to doing "real" testing, which can be summed up as "does everything else
> still work?" (that's why good testers are a phenomenally underrated bunch!)
>
> I suspect that's one of the difficulties inherent in this sort of
> development environment: the work is more or less voluntary; developing code
> is fun and results in creative satisfaction (positive feedback); rigorous
> testing for most is not (the best result is neutral and often seems or is
> viewed as unproductive).
>
> One other thing to realize is that the comments I pointed to seem to be
> specific to Writer, which is where the current threat to the proprietary
> world lies (so far as I can tell, Calc has already reached sufficient parity
> with Excel for most typical users) and where the naysayers you refer to are
> taking their current stand.
>
> But, sadly, other modules (particularly Impress) suffer from too much
> attention to cool new features (some of which are admittedly nice), and
> insufficient attention to serious flaws in fundamental functionality, like
> remaining on the same slide when you switch views, handling of tables, and
> so forth.
>
> I'll reiterate the purpose of my post, though: I just thought folks should
> be aware of these sorts of postings, since only LibreOffice users (and not
> potential ones) are likely to be on this particular forum (hence - we're
> preaching to the choir as they say). If a major multiple operating system
> forum has this sort of posting that goes unchallenged, that's another matter
> entirely; my thought was that even a public offer of help - specific
> questions and so forth - would be a positive counter-balance.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interesting-comment-about-Writer-Bugs-in-LinuxQuestions-org-tp4137415p4137497.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Charles-H. Schulz Charles-H. Schulz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

Hello folks,

Just one thing about the topic: we do have all sorts of unit testing...
just check http://wiki.documentfoundation.org

Best,

Charles.

Le Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:12:27 -0800,
Spencer Graves <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> Hi, Frank:  
>
>
>  Thanks for your clarification.  I agree on nearly all
> counts.  
>
>
>  What do LO developers do regarding unit testing — automated
> tests to confirm that certain features continue to work?  I
> contribute to another free open-source software (FOSS) project
> (r-project.org <http://r-project.org/>), where “trustworthy software”
> is ensured (when it is) by a process of developing test suites and
> documentation in parallel with the code.  Ideally, we’d like to have
> 100% coverage of all documented features.  Then any fix of one bug
> that broke something else would be flagged in the next test cycle.
> However, this is (as you say) a volunteer project, and the coverage
> is never 100%.  I don’t take the time to write tests for every
> feature, but when new bugs are reported, I add tests for those before
> I actually fix them.  And some organizations pay people full time to
> support FOSS projects.  (I’ve heard that Google supports Linux to
> ensure that they get features and bug fixes they want.  LO would be
> better if more large organizations make similar investments in LO.)
>
>
>  Best Wishes
>  Spencer
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:30 PM, CVAlkan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Spenser:
> >
> > What you're saying is certainly true, but in this case it really
> > didn't sound like it was "pro-Microsoft" but rather "anti-LO" - a
> > subtle difference perhaps, but I believe a significant one.
> >
> > The real danger, I suspect, is that, knowing we're gaining on the
> > proprietary world, we tend to automatically discount some of the
> > comments that are put out assuming they are "sour grapes" or
> > marketing misinformation. In particular, however, the one
> > responder's comment: "contains lot of regression errors in the most
> > simple things" (I'm assuming the writer means "basic" as opposed to
> > "simple") is really not that difficult to justify over the course
> > of the 4.x releases, and not recognizing that will not result in
> > the continued progress I think we all want. Even realizing that the
> > 4.x series represents a major step forward in lots of ways, there
> > are quite a surprising number of things that seem to have been
> > "broken" along the path to cleaning and enhancing the code.
> >
> > I realize that "quite a surprising number of things" is a little
> > vague, so I'll mention that one piddly insignificant user alone who
> > isn't in any way involved in development or testing (that would be
> > me) has filed several bugs that can be looked up: e.g. 74056,
> > 86578, 88208, and all of these were for things that I recall
> > successfully using in the past. And it isn't hard to locate other
> > new bugs related to indexing, printing, table formatting and so
> > forth that others have filed. Whether these bugs were introduced
> > due to over-enthusiastic coding, "cowboy coding" (as we used to
> > call it, a flawed integration process, lack of testing, lack of
> > code reviews, and so forth is, of course, not for me to say. And,
> > I'm using the phrase "lack of testing" to include an amateurish
> > reliance on simple "does it work?" testing as opposed to doing
> > "real" testing, which can be summed up as "does everything else
> > still work?" (that's why good testers are a phenomenally underrated
> > bunch!)
> >
> > I suspect that's one of the difficulties inherent in this sort of
> > development environment: the work is more or less voluntary;
> > developing code is fun and results in creative satisfaction
> > (positive feedback); rigorous testing for most is not (the best
> > result is neutral and often seems or is viewed as unproductive).
> >
> > One other thing to realize is that the comments I pointed to seem
> > to be specific to Writer, which is where the current threat to the
> > proprietary world lies (so far as I can tell, Calc has already
> > reached sufficient parity with Excel for most typical users) and
> > where the naysayers you refer to are taking their current stand.
> >
> > But, sadly, other modules (particularly Impress) suffer from too
> > much attention to cool new features (some of which are admittedly
> > nice), and insufficient attention to serious flaws in fundamental
> > functionality, like remaining on the same slide when you switch
> > views, handling of tables, and so forth.
> >
> > I'll reiterate the purpose of my post, though: I just thought folks
> > should be aware of these sorts of postings, since only LibreOffice
> > users (and not potential ones) are likely to be on this particular
> > forum (hence - we're preaching to the choir as they say). If a
> > major multiple operating system forum has this sort of posting that
> > goes unchallenged, that's another matter entirely; my thought was
> > that even a public offer of help - specific questions and so forth
> > - would be a positive counter-balance.
> >
> > Frank
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interesting-comment-about-Writer-Bugs-in-LinuxQuestions-org-tp4137415p4137497.html
> > Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> > Problems?
> > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> > Posting guidelines + more:
> > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive:
> > http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent
> > to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
> >
>
>



--
Charles-H. Schulz
Co-founder, The Document Foundation,
Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
Mobile Number: +33 (0)6 98 65 54 24.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
TomD TomD
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Interesting comment about Writer Bugs in LinuxQuestions.org

In reply to this post by Spencer Graves-2
Hi :)
1.   I think part of the problem is that we push the latest version of
the newest branch all the time.  It's only experienced people or
people on this list who may realise that features broken in the
"Fresh" branch may well get fixed soon or are already still working in
"Still".

A lot of us tell people who run into problems with LO to use the more
matured branch and that often solves people's problems.   A lot of us
seem to stick with the more mature branch in the same way that many
companies wont install an MS product before it reaches Sp2 or Sp1.  We
get a lot of flack for giving that advice but it seems to work.

2.   There are a lot of other companies that pay devs to work on LO.
Redhat do a LOT.  openSuSE did so much that they were even able to bud
that department off into forming a separate company!  I think there
are even some governments or departments who employ people to work on
LO and not always 'just' as devs.  The Indian government funded a
project to work on translations of tutorials for many FOSS projects
including LO.  Canonical (the company behind Ubuntu) employ about 1 or
2.  I suspect there are a lot of fairly small companies who employ
just one or 2 or maybe part-time devs to work on LO in order to save a
ton of money compared to how much they would spend on license fees for
MSO.

Regards from
Tom :)



On 25 January 2015 at 21:12, Spencer Graves <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi, Frank:
>
>
>           Thanks for your clarification.  I agree on nearly all counts.
>
>
>           What do LO developers do regarding unit testing — automated tests to confirm that certain features continue to work?  I contribute to another free open-source software (FOSS) project (r-project.org <http://r-project.org/>), where “trustworthy software” is ensured (when it is) by a process of developing test suites and documentation in parallel with the code.  Ideally, we’d like to have 100% coverage of all documented features.  Then any fix of one bug that broke something else would be flagged in the next test cycle.  However, this is (as you say) a volunteer project, and the coverage is never 100%.  I don’t take the time to write tests for every feature, but when new bugs are reported, I add tests for those before I actually fix them.  And some organizations pay people full time to support FOSS projects.  (I’ve heard that Google supports Linux to ensure that they get features and bug fixes they want.  LO would be better if more large organizations make similar investments in LO.)
>
>
>           Best Wishes
>           Spencer
>
>
>> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:30 PM, CVAlkan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Spenser:
>>
>> What you're saying is certainly true, but in this case it really didn't
>> sound like it was "pro-Microsoft" but rather "anti-LO" - a subtle difference
>> perhaps, but I believe a significant one.
>>
>> The real danger, I suspect, is that, knowing we're gaining on the
>> proprietary world, we tend to automatically discount some of the comments
>> that are put out assuming they are "sour grapes" or marketing
>> misinformation. In particular, however, the one responder's comment:
>> "contains lot of regression errors in the most simple things" (I'm assuming
>> the writer means "basic" as opposed to "simple") is really not that
>> difficult to justify over the course of the 4.x releases, and not
>> recognizing that will not result in the continued progress I think we all
>> want. Even realizing that the 4.x series represents a major step forward in
>> lots of ways, there are quite a surprising number of things that seem to
>> have been "broken" along the path to cleaning and enhancing the code.
>>
>> I realize that "quite a surprising number of things" is a little vague, so
>> I'll mention that one piddly insignificant user alone who isn't in any way
>> involved in development or testing (that would be me) has filed several bugs
>> that can be looked up: e.g. 74056, 86578, 88208, and all of these were for
>> things that I recall successfully using in the past. And it isn't hard to
>> locate other new bugs related to indexing, printing, table formatting and so
>> forth that others have filed. Whether these bugs were introduced due to
>> over-enthusiastic coding, "cowboy coding" (as we used to call it, a flawed
>> integration process, lack of testing, lack of code reviews, and so forth is,
>> of course, not for me to say. And, I'm using the phrase "lack of testing" to
>> include an amateurish reliance on simple "does it work?" testing as opposed
>> to doing "real" testing, which can be summed up as "does everything else
>> still work?" (that's why good testers are a phenomenally underrated bunch!)
>>
>> I suspect that's one of the difficulties inherent in this sort of
>> development environment: the work is more or less voluntary; developing code
>> is fun and results in creative satisfaction (positive feedback); rigorous
>> testing for most is not (the best result is neutral and often seems or is
>> viewed as unproductive).
>>
>> One other thing to realize is that the comments I pointed to seem to be
>> specific to Writer, which is where the current threat to the proprietary
>> world lies (so far as I can tell, Calc has already reached sufficient parity
>> with Excel for most typical users) and where the naysayers you refer to are
>> taking their current stand.
>>
>> But, sadly, other modules (particularly Impress) suffer from too much
>> attention to cool new features (some of which are admittedly nice), and
>> insufficient attention to serious flaws in fundamental functionality, like
>> remaining on the same slide when you switch views, handling of tables, and
>> so forth.
>>
>> I'll reiterate the purpose of my post, though: I just thought folks should
>> be aware of these sorts of postings, since only LibreOffice users (and not
>> potential ones) are likely to be on this particular forum (hence - we're
>> preaching to the choir as they say). If a major multiple operating system
>> forum has this sort of posting that goes unchallenged, that's another matter
>> entirely; my thought was that even a public offer of help - specific
>> questions and so forth - would be a positive counter-balance.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interesting-comment-about-Writer-Bugs-in-LinuxQuestions-org-tp4137415p4137497.html
>> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
>> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted