Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 10/3/2014 12:35 PM, Florian Reisinger <> wrote:
Q: Why do not get bugs fixed at the moment they are reported?
A: Before devs see the bug, it goes through the hands of QA. We are
a small team and have a lot of backlog on reported bugs. (More bugs are
reported than we are able to tackle)

All well and good, but has nothing to do with what started the flamefest.

1. It took a few days in the bug to get it confirmed.

2. 3 *months* later, Joel asked a question making it very plain he did
not bother to even read the bug report and subsequent comments

3. 1 month later, Jan-Marek posted a patch (thanks Jan-Marek!)

4. 1 month later the bug reporter asked (reasonably politely) if the fix
would be back-ported to 4.3.

5. The same day Joel responded with a rude "Feel free to submit a
patch...' and more like it.

So, it was confirmed very quickly. At that point, the dev who cause it
should have been contacted to fix it, and that same dev should have
taken ono the responsibility of pushing the fix to at least 4.3, if not
also 4.2 (had it been fixed soon after being confirmed, it would have
made more sense to push it to 4.2).

Q: Why the hack did you tell someone to get some money in its hand to get it fixed?
A: I hear such voices very often and got the same answer: Either
help (so that others does not have to wait so long) or pay. Or continue
hoping, that a dev will tackle your pet bug in its free time

And yet again this comment totally ignores the fact that we are talking
about newly contributed code (not some old/pre-existing/legacy bug), and
that software developers should take ownership of their code.

Q: I have a problem XYZ for months but I did not want to report a bug....
A: For us it is like the bug did not exist (ans answer to the next

I have no problem reporting bugs, and have multiple times, so n/a...

Q: I will argue for an hour, but won't check something gets confirmed in a few moments
A: Everyone knowing how this is done will help you, if you ask...

Apparently some of this is a language thing, so I'll give you some room.

But I would seriously ask that you address your apparent unwillingness
to differentiate between:

a) new bugs that are introduced with new code from existing/current
developers, and that these devs should 'own their code' - meaning be
willing to fix bugs when they are confirmed *and* push the changes to
the releases without resorting to responses suggesting users fix it
themselves and/or pay someone else to do it,


b) and old/pre-existing/legacy bugs that were introduced by someone long

I ask again - are you in disagreement with the above? If so, please, by
all means, attempt to explain how you can logically and rationally be in
opposition to this principle.

To unsubscribe 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.