Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

(2011/06/01 1:58), Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2011-05-31 11:06, Takashi Nakamoto a écrit :
Hi all,

(2011/05/30 6:28), Cor Nouws wrote:
Hi Marc, all,

[ ooops what a terrible cross post, four lists ;-)
I skipp the project and website list for the moment
and IMO follow ups for my subject (see below)
should be at marketing preferably
devs with an relevant opinion can either join or
hire a gohst writer ;-)

Marc Paré wrote (27-05-11 16:57)

It's time that we get on with creating the page on the main site. So
unless anyone is going to offer to create/design the page, I'll take
care of it. I have not had a lot of practice at Silverstripe, so you
will have to be patient with me.

We have worked on the screenshot protocols which have now been put on
the website wiki pages[1] (thanks to Klaus! and all other for their
comments). BTW ... .png's will be the format to use. We will have to
point this out to the translation teams for when they take their

* I will follow the same format as on the "New Features and Fixes" web
pages[2]. If I understand it correctly, we are to have a 3.4 webpage
a 3.3.2 webpage (essentially what we have now on the "New Features and
Fixes webpage). These pages will be used by website visitors to compare
the features between both versions of LibreOffice. We are not comparing
to MSO nor OOo. So, IMO, both pages should have the same page format so
that our visitors feel comfortable moving from one page to the other.

Any comments before I jump in? Any comments?

What I want to stress, is that we need to explain, and show
- the release rationale:
point zero release is only for ..., and not for ...
- plus that IMO we must at least for point zero releases
the knows nasty bugs
On the current release notes page those are not visible. I propose to
change that.

I totally agree with this idea. We should address known bugs in the
release note or in an alternative page.

Some of the bugs depend on the bug #35673 are still open, so I assume
these are the nasty bugs we should address in the appropriate page.

One contributor from Japanese community, Shinji Enoki, has been
collecting known bugs information, especially for providing know bug
information to Japanese users.

I guess this page is prepared for translation, so you may see some
Japanese there, but you can still easily pick up known bugs from this
page. I hope it helps.

Best regards,
Takashi Nakamoto

There must be a better way to do this. Perhaps this is where the ESC
committee could step in and create a process whereby, at release time,
these may be noted on the webpage for users to read.

I am not sure if listing all known bugs on a user page is the right way
to go. How will you keep it updated? You would have to have a person
devoted to tracking all of the bug resolutions for the page.

On the other hand, if there is a bugzilla page listing all the
outstanding bugs, then we could point users to that page. It would
simplify the work for all of us.

I agree with you. There must be better way to do this. Yes, linking to a bugzilla page might be the best if we take into account maintenance cost.

However, a mere link to bugzilla may not help users who don't understand English. For that, Mr. Enoki prepares a list of known bugs in our native language. I think that's why he prepared that list.

Yet we don't have to update the known bug lists. It's not that users want to keep track of how those bugs are treated. They may just want to see what bugs are in the latest released version. For that, putting Bugzilla id on the list, and encouraging users to see Bugzilla for further information is sufficient.

I encouraged Mr. Enoki to move that page to a different page from the user page anyway. So, I hope he will do it soon.

Best regards,
 Takashi Nakamoto

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.