[board-discuss] Membership Committee self-nomination
Hi, Statement: I am hacking on LibreOffice since its birth, contributing features and fixes mostly around Writer. I would like to be part of the Membership Committee to ensure that every aspect of the TDF community is represented in the committee, including developers. Given my background, I'm happy to help the work of the committee also at a technical level (git, gerrit issues). Full name: Miklos Vajna Email: vmik...@collabora.co.uk Affiliation: Collabora I'll provide information on all future changes of the above as soon as possible, if there will be any. Regards, Miklos signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[board-discuss] Acceptance of MC role
I, Miklos Vajna, elected member of the Membership Committee of The Document Foundation (Stiftung bürgerlichen Rechts), hereby accept this position. Signed: Miklos Vajna -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[board-discuss] Membership Committee self-nomination
Hi, Statement: I am hacking on LibreOffice since its birth, contributing features and fixes mostly around Writer. I would like to continue being part of the Membership Committee to ensure that every aspect of the TDF community is represented in the committee, including developers. Given my background, I'm happy to help the work of the committee also at a technical level (gerrit issues, BoD elections). Full name: Miklos Vajna Email: vmik...@collabora.co.uk Affiliation: Collabora I'll provide information on all future changes of the above as soon as possible, if there will be any. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Preliminary Results for the 2018 Membership Committee election
Hi Marina, On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:07:33PM +0200, Marina Latini wrote: > The above preliminary results are in conflict with § 8 IV of our > statutes (https://www.documentfoundation.org/statutes.pdf), with both > Miklos and Jona having the same affiliation. The elected candidates and > the board are currently discussing options to resolve this conflict, > which will likely affect the final results. We will update the members > and the general public on this soon. I talked to Jona and in case we're asked about what is our preference: I propose me stepping down in favor of her (and me initially mentoring/helping her in my place if wanted), i.e. I don't accept the above role. A concern is now that Stephan and me would finish work in the committee, noone remains with stronger technical skills, when it comes to recovering from odd situations with git, gerrit, etc. To cover that, I plan to stick around (initially) so Jona (or another MC member) is trained up and doing this -- again, if this kind of help is requested by the new MC. Regards, Miklos signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting "Tender for implementing support for a dedicated, built-in UNO object,inspection tool (Xray-built-in debugger)"
Hi Lothar, > a) (Completeness of the specification) Isn't it appropriate to assign the > right Version of LibO and the UNO API to it, at least what is the version > (or with what LibO Version delivered) the "WatchCode"-Implementation should > be used for the UI work? Which version of the XRAY and MRI tool is here > relevant, at least say "the latest" with a hint for a source for them. I think the idea is that the work is developed on LibreOffice master, so it gets released in the next major version after the work is done. This is how all previous tenders were delivered. The result is part of LibreOffice itself, so specifying a LibreOffice version adds no value. XRAY and MRI are just examples of what's possible for an inspection tool, so I would consider their version as not relevant. > b) (Feature request) I miss this great feature to have a code autocompletion, > for example in VS you can set the "." as referenciator and that get the > possible services or DOM Tree alternatives or... and also complete the > parameter part when hitting return (or is this meant with the Copy & Paste > feature?) My understanding is that we currently provide no good autocompletion APIs, and such an inspection tool would build on top of it. If you add autocompletion to the scope, it can easily double the amount of needed work, so I would carefully avoid that. > c) (Completeness of the specification) It is mentioned, that "everywhere > where possible" to lean on automatic testing. Well, to be honest, this is a > huge field. Shouldn't we specify this a little bit more in detail, what we do > expect here? Are there automatic test tools we are already using which > we want to see or for which we want to have the automation scripts or ...? I believe the current wording was used for previous tenders already, without problems. The idea is that whenever a sub-task is done (something gets fixed or implemented), it should be considered to add a test for it. It's hard to specify this more than this: if you add quantity requirements, then it's easy to add a lot of useless tests, and it's not easy to measure test quality with numbers. :-) I would prefer a reasonable amount of good tests, rather than a lot of useless tests. The effort needed to add tests is also different for each & every case: sometimes it's a shame that a test is not added, sometimes it would be a heroic effort to cover some behavior with an automated test. > d) (Details in the proposal) I would also expect a detailed estimation in the > sense that it is not just a figure but at least one for each mentioned > feature in the mandatory as well as in the optional part. If they are > proposing other features (not mentioned here) they should do it as well with a > figure for it. Is it mentioned anywhere? It is possible it's hard to compare proposals if the proposals have optional features. One consistent way is to asssume you order / not order everything optional. I imagine if the proposal is detailed enough, there is a brief description of each sub-task, how it would be done -- then you can get the impression at the end that the bidder did their homework, and the number at the bottom of the offer is not just a ball-park. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting "Tender for implementing support for a dedicated, built-in UNO object,inspection tool (Xray-built-in debugger)"
Hi Florian, On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 04:58:40PM +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: > One question raised is wrt. navigator overlapping with parts of the tender. > Answers and insight to that highly appreciated! My understanding is that the navigator is created for end-users, while this inspection tool would be created for consumers of the UNO API (macro authors, extension developers, etc). So indeed there is some overlap, but the two tools would rather complement each other than duplicate functionality. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting Tender "Text layout"
Hi Florian, all, On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 08:30:37AM +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: > one of the approved [1] tenders is the > > Tender "Text layout" > > The board would like to work together in public with all of you on this > tender before it gets officially published. The current draft is therefore > shared at > > https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/43563WKN7pyNoMB > > The board is happy to get your feedback and proposals. We'd like to discuss > this ideally in the board call after next, i.e. on Friday, November 19, at > 1300 Berlin time. Please send your feedback to the public > board-discuss@documentfoundation.org mailing list. Lubos did some work in this area in the recent past, and based on that experience the expectation is that the referenced tdf#133685 is a Windows-only problem (most of the time is spent in Windows API calls), and thus unrelated to the "Text layout" topic. Is it intentional to include that bug in the tender, even if it seems to be an unrelated performance problem? If not, then perhaps you could consider removing that from the scope. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting Tender "Cleanup & further improve ODF conformance"
Hi Florian, On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 02:30:31PM +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: > Regina (thanks a lot!) sent a list of bugs back in December on the dev > mailing list: > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2021-December/088210.html > > Was there any further discussion or feedback on this? If the list mentioned > there is fine, I replace item 2 from the tender with it. If we're unsure > whether that meets the budget or not, as the person days are listed in the > tender, we can add a note along the lines of "Please propose a subset and > prioritization of these bugs, that do not exceed the person days factored in > for this tender, see below." I think this approach could work. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting Tender "Cleanup & further improve ODF conformance"
Hi Florian, On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 10:35:01AM +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: > are we fine with publishing the tender in that state, any further edits > before we proceed with tendering that? One part that confuses me (but I'm not native) is the "some or more" wording: does it mean "one or more" or something else? Otherwise it looks reasonable to me: the full list of tasks is obviously more than the resource limit you have at the end, but as long as the wording allows bidders to only offer a subset, this looks fine. Thanks, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Drafting Tender "Look-ahead styleref field for Writer"
Hi, On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 03:42:34PM +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: > Miklos has already cooperated with the ODF TC when implementing "Gutter". > Perhaps he can tell how large is the additional effort. For an implementer > it is much easier to write down the needed info for the OASIS TC than for > someone else. I haven't tried filling out that newer "proposal template", but just writing up the usual information needed for an OASIS issue + implementing ODF import + export is perhaps half a week of work. So If you increase the scope and adapt the time to 2 weeks, it could work. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Membership Committee self-nomination
Hi, Statement: I am hacking on LibreOffice since its birth, contributing features and fixes mostly around Writer. I would like to be part of the Membership Committee to ensure that every aspect of the TDF community is represented in the committee, including developers. Given my background, I'm happy to help the work of the committee also at a technical level. Full name: Miklos Vajna Email: vmik...@collabora.com Affiliation: Collabora I'll provide information on all future changes of the above as soon as possible, if there will be any. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] First Questions To All MC Candidates
Hi Andreas, On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 05:40:05PM +0200, Andreas Mantke wrote: > - What are the criteria to measure the value of a contribution? > > - Which are the criteria for a non trivial or obviously insignificant > contribution? > > - Would your rating differ from areas of contribution? My approach would be the same as the way we worked during the 2016 - 2018 term, follow the criteria outlined in § 10 of the statues. Make sure that "doers" stay / become members and the opposite for others. Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Re: Acceptance of MC role
Hi Thorsten, On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 12:29:25AM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > I kindly invite you to officially accept your position into the > MC, by answering this message with a "Reply to all". I, Miklos Vajna, elected member of the Membership Committee of The Document Foundation, hereby accept this position within the Stiftung bürgerlichen Rechts. My term will start September 19, 2022. Signed: Miklos Vajna Ich, Miklos Vajna, gewähltes Mitglied des Mitglieder-Komitees der The Document Foundation, nehme mein Amt innerhalb der Stiftung bürgerlichen Rechts an. Meine Amtszeit beginnt am 19. September 2022. Unterzeichnet: Miklos Vajna Regards, Miklos -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
