Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

Hi Bernard, *,

Bernhard Dippold wrote (01-10-10 23:20)

> [BUGS]
> discussions/proposals about *bugs* in LibreOffice
>
> [FEATURES]
> discussions/proposals about new *features* for LibreOffice

Both are strongly development related.
Core development has found its place on FreeDesktop.
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/

Maybe it is enough to have Bugs/Features on one list, DEV@ ?
This would be the place where people discuss features, bugs, proposals.

Also I think QA@ is a good thing.

> [L10N]
> for discussions/proposals about *localization* of the product
>
> [WEBSITE]
> for discussions/proposals about the *website*, forums, wiki, IRC etc
>
> [MAILING LIST]
> for discussions/proposals about the *mailing lists* structures

Why not discuss@ ?

> [NATIVE-LANG]
> discussions/proposals about *native-language* structures
>
> [DOCUMENTATION]
> discussions/proposals about the *documentation* of LibreOffice
>
> [MARKETING]
> discussions/proposals about *marketing* for The Document Foundation and
> LibreOffice
>
> [GENERAL]
> discussions/proposals about *everything else*

Why not discuss@ ?

(I've seen your mail for shorter names, which for long names I support.)

Regards,
Cor

--
  - free OpenOffice.org :: LibreOffice -
  - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

bedipp bedipp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re:=?UTF-8?B?IFs=?=tdf-discuss=?UTF-8?B?XSBb?=WEB=?UTF-8?B?XSA=?=interim=?UTF-8?B?IA==?=structuring=?UTF-8?B?IA==?=-=?UTF-8?B?IA==?=a=?UTF-8?B?IA==?=proposal

Hi Cor,

> Hi Bernard, *,
>
> Bernhard Dippold wrote (01-10-10 23:20)
>
> > [BUGS]
> > discussions/proposals about *bugs* in LibreOffice
> >
> > [FEATURES]
> > discussions/proposals about new *features* for LibreOffice
>
> Both are strongly development related.
> Core development has found its place on FreeDesktop.
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/
>
> Maybe it is enough to have Bugs/Features on one list, DEV@ ?
> This would be the place where people discuss features, bugs, proposals.

I wanted to provide a possibility to report bugs and talk about possible features for non-developers.

There are some threads about bugs here on the list, and as long as there is no bugzilla enabled with an easy frontend, I think we'll see more of them here.

>
> Also I think QA@ is a good thing.

+1
>
> > [L10N]
> > for discussions/proposals about *localization* of the product
> >
> > [WEBSITE]
> > for discussions/proposals about the *website*, forums, wiki, IRC etc
[WEB]
> >
> > [MAILING LIST]
> > for discussions/proposals about the *mailing lists* structures
>
> Why not discuss@ ?
I'd support the suggestion about  [WEB]
>
> > [NATIVE-LANG]
> > discussions/proposals about *native-language* structures
[N-L]
> >
> > [DOCUMENTATION]
> > discussions/proposals about the *documentation* of LibreOffice
[DOC]
> >
> > [MARKETING]
> > discussions/proposals about *marketing* for The Document Foundation and
> > LibreOffice
[MKT]?
> >
> > [GENERAL]
> > discussions/proposals about *everything else*
>
> Why not discuss@ ?

just to avoid double naming ;-)

When other threads move to different mailing lists, they will not need any tags any more...

Best regards

Bernhard



--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

André Schnabel André Schnabel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: [tdf-discuss] [WEB] interim structuring - a proposal

Hi,


Am 03.10.2010 00:21, schrieb Dr. Bernhard Dippold:
>
> There are some threads about bugs here on the list, and as long as
> there is no bugzilla enabled with an easy frontend, I think we'll see
> more of them here.
>

Oh, Bugzilla *is* enabled:
    https://bugs.freedesktop.org
Product: LibreOffice

André
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Gianluca Turconi Gianluca Turconi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: [tdf-discuss] [WEB] interim structuring - a proposal

On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 10:09:34 +0200
André wrote:

> Oh, Bugzilla *is* enabled:
>     https://bugs.freedesktop.org
> Product: LibreOffice

So, is FreeDesktop the official home for LibreOffice devs or it a
provisional one?

There should be, at least, a central info access point.

Regards
--
Gianluca Turconi
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

italovignoli italovignoli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: [tdf-discuss] [WEB] interim structuring - a proposal

Gianluca Turconi wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 10:09:34 +0200
> André wrote:
>
>> Oh, Bugzilla *is* enabled:
>>     https://bugs.freedesktop.org
>> Product: LibreOffice
>
> So, is FreeDesktop the official home for LibreOffice devs or it a
> provisional one?
>
> There should be, at least, a central info access point.

We are working hard at the infrastructure. I would consider the actual
situation as an interim one, although all contents will be migrated to
the final infastructure when every detail will be set.

There is a "developer" page on TDF web site with most of the relevant
information (http://documentfoundation.org). At the moment, we use TDF
web site for all the information.

--
Italo Vignoli
Mobile: +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Email: [hidden email] - Skype: italovignoli
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Italo Vignoli
Director - The Document Foundation
vuhung vuhung
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [tdf-discuss] [WEB] interim structuring - a proposal

In reply to this post by Gianluca Turconi
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Gianluca Turconi
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> There should be, at least, a central info access point.
+1

LiberOffice is a huge project and email based discussion/management
will not fit.
We will easily lose the control over it.

As discusses, I give a GO for using bugzilla as bug tracking system.

We also be able to abuse Bugzilla to manage the features of each
development roadmap/version


--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng
 )
vuhung16plus{remove}@gmail.dot.com , YIM: vuhung16 , Skype: vuhung16plus
A brief profile: http://www.hn.is.uec.ac.jp/~vuhung/Nguyen.Vu.Hung.html
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Thorsten Behrens Thorsten Behrens
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
Cor Nouws wrote:
> Also I think QA@ is a good thing.
>
I think I fundamentally disagree on this one - the interface between
QA and Dev is incredibly huge, I'd even venture the proposition that
ideally there's no difference (in core competencies - maybe there is
one in attitude ;)) - at any rate, the chasm between the OpenOffice
project's QA and Dev teams is something I *do not* want to
transplant into our new project.

Ideally, I want QA folks to take notice if the Devs start debating
details of specific features, and conversely, I want Devs to take
notice of QA talking about specific "problem areas" in the product.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Volker Merschmann Volker Merschmann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

Hi Thorsten,

2010/10/4 Thorsten Behrens <[hidden email]>:

> Cor Nouws wrote:
>> Also I think QA@ is a good thing.
>>
> I think I fundamentally disagree on this one - the interface between
> QA and Dev is incredibly huge, I'd even venture the proposition that
> ideally there's no difference (in core competencies - maybe there is
> one in attitude ;)) - at any rate, the chasm between the OpenOffice
> project's QA and Dev teams is something I *do not* want to
> transplant into our new project.
>
> Ideally, I want QA folks to take notice if the Devs start debating
> details of specific features, and conversely, I want Devs to take
> notice of QA talking about specific "problem areas" in the product.
>
But you should also be aware that there are much qa-people which are
doing just testing.
These are not so "technical" and wouldn't like to read or even
understand the things on the dev-list. And there is much
organisational stuff around the testing which wouldn't interest the
developers.

Just my 2c

Volker
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

Hi everyone!

Am Montag, den 04.10.2010, 22:00 +0200 schrieb Volker Merschmann:

> > Ideally, I want QA folks to take notice if the Devs start debating
> > details of specific features, and conversely, I want Devs to take
> > notice of QA talking about specific "problem areas" in the product.
> >
> But you should also be aware that there are much qa-people which are
> doing just testing.
> These are not so "technical" and wouldn't like to read or even
> understand the things on the dev-list. And there is much
> organisational stuff around the testing which wouldn't interest the
> developers.

Interesting discussion ... I think I do understand all your reasons,
although they aren't fundamentally different.

Same is true for a topic like UX (User Experience). You have to collect
material for UX, you have to discuss issues within UX, it is required to
kick-off activities from UX (e.g. collect tiny usability issues). But on
the other hand, it is extremely important to keep in touch with
development - to be consulted, to understand the other persons'
problems, ...

So I think we'll end up with different infrastructure bits for each of
the teams. But if it is about collaboration, we shouldn't be that far
away from each other - may it be working in small teams or being located
on the same mailing list.

Somehow, we have to bridge that gap ...

Cheers,
Christoph

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Thorsten Behrens Thorsten Behrens
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

Christoph Noack wrote:

> > > Ideally, I want QA folks to take notice if the Devs start debating
> > > details of specific features, and conversely, I want Devs to take
> > > notice of QA talking about specific "problem areas" in the product.
> > >
> > But you should also be aware that there are much qa-people which are
> > doing just testing.
> > These are not so "technical" and wouldn't like to read or even
> > understand the things on the dev-list. And there is much
> > organisational stuff around the testing which wouldn't interest the
> > developers.
>
> Interesting discussion ... I think I do understand all your reasons,
> although they aren't fundamentally different.
>
> Same is true for a topic like UX (User Experience). You have to collect
> material for UX, you have to discuss issues within UX, it is required to
> kick-off activities from UX (e.g. collect tiny usability issues). But on
> the other hand, it is extremely important to keep in touch with
> development - to be consulted, to understand the other persons'
> problems, ...
>
True - with the distinction that QA is affected by *every* bit of
development, whereas UX only comes into play for things UI-related.

I do see the "don't irritate non-technical QA people" argument - but
on the other hand I *do* want to get them technically savvy over
time, and pick up the 'smell' on were to invest time, if
<stereotype>Dev A starts to hack on the uno registry code
again</stereotype>.

Building two camps again, I fear, will not yield the kind of
collaborative athmosphere I so clearly envision for QA/Dev - case in
point is one Raphael Bircher, who loudly complains about perceived
problems doing QA in LibO - I want those concerns voiced on a list
were they can be discussed with the devs, not to echo unheard in
some zoo made up for QA. ;)

(I could probably live with a bugs@tdf alias, where discussions is
purely about bugs, how to reproduce them, etc - but really, QA is
much more than that)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Eric Hoch Eric Hoch
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

Hi Christoph, Thorsten,
Am Mon, 4 Oct 2010 23:10:27 +0200 schrieb Thorsten Behrens:

> I do see the "don't irritate non-technical QA people" argument - but
> on the other hand I *do* want to get them technically savvy over
> time, and pick up the 'smell' on were to invest time, if
> <stereotype>Dev A starts to hack on the uno registry code
> again</stereotype>.

That's how it started for me. I'm still at the very beginning of
coding at maybe I'm way to old to ever learn it entirely but I
wanted to have some menu points in the Mac Menu of OOo once the
Start Center and/or the last window is closed and you only see the
menu bar. So I asked Eric Bachard where to look in the code for
this menu part and after he told me I began reading that code parts
and after some trial and error figured out how to manipulate them.
I'm now happy that - at least in LibreOffice Beta - the changes I
did are in the build and perhaps even better than I could have done
them but it's a starting point. And when you do QA and talk about
this on various fairs people come up with ideas and now that I did
my first hackings I'm a step further into LibO/OOo.

> Building two camps again, I fear, will not yield the kind of
> collaborative athmosphere I so clearly envision for QA/Dev - case in
> point is one Raphael Bircher, who loudly complains about perceived
> problems doing QA in LibO - I want those concerns voiced on a list
> were they can be discussed with the devs, not to echo unheard in
> some zoo made up for QA. ;)

+1

> (I could probably live with a bugs@tdf alias, where discussions is
> purely about bugs, how to reproduce them, etc - but really, QA is
> much more than that)

+1

Eric

--
## de.OpenOffice.org - Office für MacOS X, Linux, Solaris & Windows
## Openoffice.org - ich steck mit drin!
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Charles Marcus Charles Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
On 2010-10-04 4:27 PM, Christoph Noack wrote:
> So I think we'll end up with different infrastructure bits for each
> of the teams. But if it is about collaboration, we shouldn't be that
> far away from each other - may it be working in small teams or being
> located on the same mailing list.
>
> Somehow, we have to bridge that gap ...

How about creating a single 'collaberation' list, that only accepts
messages from designated members of the other lists (we could use
volunteers for this), and these designated 'collaberators' wouild be
responsible for sending messages to the 'collaberation' list to notify
everyone that a conversation that affects one or more of the others is
occurring on whatever the other list is - then someone could go read
that thread and comment or take whatever action is appropriate.

The collab list could require [TAGS] in the subject, one [TAG] for each
of the other lists.

This way developers could just be members of their respective list, and
the collab list, and (using filters on the [TAGS] easily monitor issues
on the collab list that pertained to them...

Just a rough idea, but maybe could be made to work...?

--

Best regards,

Charles
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/

Christoph Noack-2 Christoph Noack-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAILING LIST] interim structuring - a proposal

In reply to this post by Thorsten Behrens
Hi Thorsten,

just a few comments ... that may go on forever ;-)

Am Montag, den 04.10.2010, 23:10 +0200 schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
> Christoph Noack wrote:
> > > > Ideally, I want QA folks to take notice if the Devs start debating
> > > > details of specific features, and conversely, I want Devs to take
> > > > notice of QA talking about specific "problem areas" in the product.
[...]
> > Same is true for a topic like UX (User Experience). You have to collect
> > material for UX, you have to discuss issues within UX, it is required to
> > kick-off activities from UX (e.g. collect tiny usability issues). But on
> > the other hand, it is extremely important to keep in touch with
> > development - to be consulted, to understand the other persons'
> > problems, ...
> >
> True - with the distinction that QA is affected by *every* bit of
> development, whereas UX only comes into play for things UI-related.

Well, it depends on how much UX you want to do in a project. Some
cooperations incorporate UX also for API decisions to make sure that
those are most usable and understandable for developers (to state an
example). At the moment (and this is most appreciated), the developers
within the community care about that.

Currently, UX within OOo focuses (if anybody wants to listen to us *g*)
on the more visible things and the usefulness of features even before
they get implemented. I think/hope this won't change much (currently
there is no reason) for LibO.

[...]

> (I could probably live with a bugs@tdf alias, where discussions is
> purely about bugs, how to reproduce them, etc - but really, QA is
> much more than that)

My personal experience is, that the most efficient and effective work
has been done within the smaller i-Teams. For more complex features /
changes (I hope there will be some), this really helps to focus ... and
it helps to understand each other, because Documentation, QA,
Development, UX ... everyone is on board right from the start. So you
learn from each other - and if not, then something is really wrong.

So, more close Dev/QA cooperation = +1, an even closer cooperation for
complex development topics = ++1 ;-)

Cheers,
Christoph

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [hidden email]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/