Yes, I think we both (and I am sure that there are many more) want the same thing: LO being
successful and known as the best Office package and available also for people who just cannot afford
to buy an Office package.
I also understand that devs are easier to get for programming new features because this frontier
work. I can understand this very well because I used to work on frontier work myself for many years.
However, I also learned that things must be made stable. My business now is nothing else but making
operations stable. Coming from that point of view I only can encourage devs to put in all their
pride in getting LO branches stable ASAP. I feel good when I get an operation stable and a dev can
feel the same way. It might even be harder to get bugs out because it must first be understood what
causes the bug.
If I would learn about a dev who removed a bug I reported, I thank him personally! (If there is a
list where I can see it, I appreciate a lot information on where such a list is published on the web.)
I can not contribute more than bug reporting. I do this for all bugs I find and which I can document
somehow. It takes me a lot of time - a loss in my productivity - but I am willing to do so. My small
contribution to the LO project which I like. Currently I only can do this for my production version
(3.5.6.2). But I would actually like to run 2 versions on my PC: a stable one with almost no bugs,
and a newer one with new features and bugs. (This idea was expressed already by Tom, anne-ology and
maybe some other as well.) By doing so I can use time for searching bugs in the newer version, and
when I am very busy (= I need a high productivity) I can just use the stable version. For me such a
possibility would push the LO project forward at very high speed.
The success of SW is a combination of features and stability (= productivity increase). This means
the right balance is needed. The right balance of dev power for new feature compared to dev power to
fix bugs is the trick task which need to be done.
On 17.10.2012 18:51, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
I think we both want the same thing. The question is how to get it.
1. How to encourage new devs to join? At the moment we show LO as an exciting
projects for devs to get involved with and quickly see the results of their
work getting out there into the real world. As a result they are likely to get
into fixing any unexpected problems or side-issues that might have cropped up.
2. We need a "stable branch" where new stuff never gets added, just fixes
back-ported from the newer, more exciting branch.
That is pretty much what we have already. By the time the newer branch reaches
around .4 then it's usually stable enough for everyone = about as stable as the
.6 or .7 of the older branch but with better compatibility with non-native
formats and some interesting things.
If some of us helped the devs more by posting bug-reports earlier then we might
be able to help them push that stability in earlier. We might start finding
the 3. or even the .2 starts to be the one stable enough to migrate our
colleagues and co-workers to as well as ourselves instead of having to wait for
the .4.
It's on us more than the devs. They are working hard and need our support
rather than our criticism. Do we want to push devs away unless they only get
involved with boring dry stuff and no reward, no chance of showing off prowess,
no chance of getting recognition out there?
I like people in here too. I also enjoy arguing with people i like and respect
that have a good point of view and a good way of looking at the world. I
usually take good points from here and then argue in favour of them on the
marketing list because you have very valid points here.
We do need an LTS because these frequent upgrades and uncertainty are just not
possible when you have more than a handful of computers to maintain or have
limited download, or .... Well, tons of valid reasons
Regards from
Tom :)
--- On Wed, 17/10/12, Dr. R. O Stapf <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Dr. R. O Stapf <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Indexing for Search not working?
To: "Tom Davies" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, 17 October, 2012, 9:42
It's not falling behind in development. It's about stability and
this means productivity.It's like placing an always stronger engine in an
F1 car without
considering to get the power on the road. What means the best engine
when the suspension is not strong enough. With other words I feel I
spent a lot of time in this forum which are reducing my productivity
time. I don't mind being in the forum because there are nice people
here and I like to read the various opinions.)I don't know how many devs
are working on new functions and how many
on bug fixes. It would just be good to change for a certain time the
ratio of devs working on bugs.Do we want it or not we are compared against
MSO. But in MSO we
don't know the bugs.... MS neglects them.On 17.10.2012 17:07, Tom Davies
wrote:
Hi :)Ok, so we should just get rid of or push away any devs
that are interested in adding new functionality.There
are a lot of other projects they could go to for that sort
of excitement.We could build-up a strong core of devs
that focus only on fixing things that already exist.Get
rid of any that have too much imagination.We could watch and
wait while other Office Suites develop
new functionality and then try to catch up and try to
write code to do the same thing but without the code
looking too similar.They would set the format and the
way things should look and we just try to copy exactly
without looking too similar.Let our competitors do the driving
and just gradually fall
further and further back?!!??Alternatively we could try to help
all our devs by test
driving the new branch asap.Seek out 'bugs' or anything
vaguely wonky.Post bug reports.Find work-arounds.Fall back on
the more stable release from the older branch
(we can have 2 versions installed at once right?) for when
we need to meet deadlines.The question is do we want LO to fall
behind and become
increasingly irrelevant or are we ready to help push out
into the world?Do we want LO to keep going in the future
or are we happy to be forced into switching back to MSO
one day?Regards fromTom :)--- OnWed, 17/10/12, Dr. R. O
[email protected]:From: Dr. R. O
[email protected]: Re: [libreoffice-users] Indexing for
Search not
working?To:[email protected]: Wednesday, 17
October, 2012, 8:44On 17.10.2012 16:07, Pertti Rnnberg wrote:BRAVO
Anne-Ology!!Exactly that message - only in other words -- I
have repeatedly tried to tell to the LibO-experts
(devs) since January:they must take a brake in developing
and take a
certain version (e.g. 3.4.xx) and make every module of
the suite - Base included - absolutely free of bugs
and inconsistencies both in programming and the
instructions and especially the LibO-Help.Every feature
shall have a clear explanation and
a detailed guiding how-to in the LibO-Help -- easily
understood by any average non-expert user.I cannot agree
more.I started with 3.5.4 a few month ago and saw some
problems disappearing in3.5.5 and 3.5.6. Currently I
am hesitating to upgrade to 3.5.7.I hope the dev-team
listens to Pertti's words.-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to:
[email protected]?http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/Posting
guidelines + more:http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/NetiquetteList
archive:http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/All messages sent to
this list will be publicly
archived and cannot be deleted
--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: [email protected]
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
