OO.o Moving forward ...

[Twayne-2]

Hi,

OO.o has achieved a pretty high status and reputation as a good office
suite.  For the lesser experienced with office suites and the newbies in
particular, there simply IMO is nothing better for them to get started
with.  They have no "bad habits" to unlearn, and better yet rather than
serious "exptectations" come at the application more from an
"adventurous" point of view than others.  IMO those will be the happiest
users of OO.o and rightfully so.

But(t) ... and there's always a butt around isn't there? IMO this is the
time to put a stake in the ground for the intermediates and more
advanced users, back out, and look at the application from all
directions and assess its current shortcomings.  There are a LOT of
things that need to be cleaned up in OO.o before an excellent program
becomes SO advanced that the easiest of tasks becomes a monumental
effort to incorporate.  I've looked at the code some, as a complete
outsider and more or less in a vacuum I admit, but it appears to me
there are already several places where even simple tasks will become
monumental efforts already to change things.
   As it is right now it appears that very little is being done to
address the underlying, basic problems in the app and the longer it
goes, the harder they are going to be to repair.  And in order for OO.o
to progress much further, I think the under-pinnings need to be shored
up and made more concrete.
   The number of problems (bugs or features?) in OO.o has to number in
the thousands.  A major subset of those should be collected from user
input and addressed.  Regardless of the origin of such items, their
usefulness should be evaluated and incorporated into OO.o well BEFORE it
reaches version 4!  It's entirely possible that future development may
already be hindered by making changes to basic, "established" code, but
if OO.o is to take its place in the leaders of the industry, I think
that's what's needed.
   I don't think OO.o should be "just like" Word, or WP, or any other
product.  BUT(t), regardless of where the idea comes from, if it's
better than OO.o's implementation it needs to be worked on.  Subjective
as hell sometimes, I know, but the right set of people could assemble
the needed task list for a jumping off point.

OK, here's the meat of a few "problems" as I see them.  The following is
a short-list of mine that prevents me from throwing MS Office into the
bit bin and most would exist whether I had the MSO experience or not.
The ONLY connection of MSO for me is to be able to say, "Here, I know
this can be done, because I've seen it done.".  I know, that's a little
niave but it's typical of the human mind.  The not all-inclusive
short-list:

--  OO.o is browser dependent for any Copy/Paste from a browser to
Writer, and it has to work better than it does in Writer
.  Right now it only works right if I use a text-only browser or one of
a certain group of open source browsers.  FireFox for instance will
allow copy/paste of a browser window to Writer fairly well.  IE and
others I've tested but don't recall the exact ones so I'll resist the
urge to name them here, do not allow that.
   OTOH, MS Word handles the situation smoothly, quicker and easily most
of the time.  I've been told but don't know for a fact that abi and WP
also manage it well.  When I do come across a page that Word can't
handle, neither can OO.o.
   So all in all, Writer falls short in this area every time. Even using
say FireFox, which does allow for a better copy/paste into Writer, it
still falls behind the ability of Word. There is no way I can find to
look at Writer and say that it meets or exceeds my expectations for
copying a portio nof a web page and pasting it to Writer.  I do a LOT of
online research and I think others would find this repair to be a great
enhancement too.

--  Printing envelopes capabilities are mediocre at best and seem
completely un-intuitive when adjustments to a template or a new template
must be created for them.  That should be almost a "minor detail" to
adjust or create a new envelope template.  As it is, if your situation
doesn't meet the defaults provided in the templates that do exist,
people are pretty much out of luck.  I'm constantly jumping back to Word
when I have to create an envelope.  And Word's templates of course do
not work with OO.o.

--  Image stability is still lacking.  Or maybe the defaults are just
incorrect, I don't know for sure.  All I know is if I'm going to Insert
an image into a Writer document I have to be sure to adjust the anchor
properly, because in ways not always intuitive, the current anchor
settings aren't right for the image.  It strikes me as though the
defaults weren't set to cover the majority of cases so that adjusting
them is the exception, not the norm.

--  Tables with images is, well, something, I'm not sure what, is wrong.
It's more than an achoring issue but I don't know what else.  Image
positions are unstable and even at times won't even remain in the
tables.  Whether it's defaults or what, I don't know but tables always
give me problems unless they are pure text in every cell.

I have more, but that's an example of the sorts of things I'm talking
about.  As long as it wasn't all wrapped up in that "issue" system, I'd
be glad to help too, but entering data, verifying data, whatever else I
could do.  I've tried the bug tracking abilities here before and IMO
they aren't intended for the quantity of issues they contain.

For what it's worth.  I fully realize I've not mentioned some of the
great strides OO.o has made like functional Master Document methods and
so on, but that's because they are outside the area I wish to address,
which are those where OO.o is falling short of what is possible to do.

I also believe that should this come to fruition ever, the modules
within OO.o be addressed separately.  In other words, collections should
be done for Writer and be kept separate from the others, another for
Calc, and kept separate from the others, and so on, with possibly one
top-level area for things that affect them all, or subsets of them.

Anyway, I've gotten it off my chest now<g>.  Much as I love OO.o for
what it is and how much good will I feel for it, it simply cannot become
my de-facto office suite and allow me to let go of MS's teats.

Twayne`






---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Robin Laing]

Twayne wrote:
> Hi,
>

>    The number of problems (bugs or features?) in OO.o has to number in
> the thousands.  A major subset of those should be collected from user
> input and addressed.  Regardless of the origin of such items, their
> usefulness should be evaluated and incorporated into OO.o well BEFORE it
> reaches version 4!  It's entirely possible that future development may
> already be hindered by making changes to basic, "established" code, but
> if OO.o is to take its place in the leaders of the industry, I think
> that's what's needed.

I totally agree.  All the open bugs need to be addressed by some sort of
team.  There are bugs and RFE's that have been ignored for much too
long.  They need to be addressed and either fixed or closed.  There are
many that are needed to make OOo the best application in the whole word
processing empire.

>    I don't think OO.o should be "just like" Word, or WP, or any other
> product.  BUT(t), regardless of where the idea comes from, if it's
> better than OO.o's implementation it needs to be worked on.  Subjective
> as hell sometimes, I know, but the right set of people could assemble
> the needed task list for a jumping off point.

Again, I agree.  We need OOo to be better than both of these and that
will only occur if users from both of these applications can move to OOo
and function better than in their preferred apps.  OOo is better than
Word in many cases already but it could be better.  There has been a
total lack of will to go after the WP users.  Even in our MS dominated
corp., we have many that refuse to use anything but WP.

>
> OK, here's the meat of a few "problems" as I see them.  The following is
> a short-list of mine that prevents me from throwing MS Office into the
> bit bin and most would exist whether I had the MSO experience or not.
> The ONLY connection of MSO for me is to be able to say, "Here, I know
> this can be done, because I've seen it done.".  I know, that's a little
> niave but it's typical of the human mind.  The not all-inclusive
> short-list:

Do you have RFE's or Bug numbers for reference?  If they are not
reported, they cannot/will not be fixed.

>
> --  OO.o is browser dependent for any Copy/Paste from a browser to
> Writer, and it has to work better than it does in Writer
> .  Right now it only works right if I use a text-only browser or one of
> a certain group of open source browsers.  FireFox for instance will
> allow copy/paste of a browser window to Writer fairly well.  IE and
> others I've tested but don't recall the exact ones so I'll resist the
> urge to name them here, do not allow that.
>    OTOH, MS Word handles the situation smoothly, quicker and easily most
> of the time.  I've been told but don't know for a fact that abi and WP
> also manage it well.  When I do come across a page that Word can't
> handle, neither can OO.o.
>    So all in all, Writer falls short in this area every time. Even using
> say FireFox, which does allow for a better copy/paste into Writer, it
> still falls behind the ability of Word. There is no way I can find to
> look at Writer and say that it meets or exceeds my expectations for
> copying a portio nof a web page and pasting it to Writer.  I do a LOT of
> online research and I think others would find this repair to be a great
> enhancement too.
>
> --  Printing envelopes capabilities are mediocre at best and seem
> completely un-intuitive when adjustments to a template or a new template
> must be created for them.  That should be almost a "minor detail" to
> adjust or create a new envelope template.  As it is, if your situation
> doesn't meet the defaults provided in the templates that do exist,
> people are pretty much out of luck.  I'm constantly jumping back to Word
> when I have to create an envelope.  And Word's templates of course do
> not work with OO.o.
>
> --  Image stability is still lacking.  Or maybe the defaults are just
> incorrect, I don't know for sure.  All I know is if I'm going to Insert
> an image into a Writer document I have to be sure to adjust the anchor
> properly, because in ways not always intuitive, the current anchor
> settings aren't right for the image.  It strikes me as though the
> defaults weren't set to cover the majority of cases so that adjusting
> them is the exception, not the norm.
>

I have seen these problems in Word as well.  FWIW, there are more
controls in OOo than in Word for anchoring images.  The default needs to
be changed in your case.

> --  Tables with images is, well, something, I'm not sure what, is wrong.
> It's more than an achoring issue but I don't know what else.  Image
> positions are unstable and even at times won't even remain in the
> tables.  Whether it's defaults or what, I don't know but tables always
> give me problems unless they are pure text in every cell.
>
> I have more, but that's an example of the sorts of things I'm talking
> about.  As long as it wasn't all wrapped up in that "issue" system, I'd
> be glad to help too, but entering data, verifying data, whatever else I
> could do.  I've tried the bug tracking abilities here before and IMO
> they aren't intended for the quantity of issues they contain.
>
> For what it's worth.  I fully realize I've not mentioned some of the
> great strides OO.o has made like functional Master Document methods and
> so on, but that's because they are outside the area I wish to address,
> which are those where OO.o is falling short of what is possible to do.
>
> I also believe that should this come to fruition ever, the modules
> within OO.o be addressed separately.  In other words, collections should
> be done for Writer and be kept separate from the others, another for
> Calc, and kept separate from the others, and so on, with possibly one
> top-level area for things that affect them all, or subsets of them.
>
> Anyway, I've gotten it off my chest now<g>.  Much as I love OO.o for
> what it is and how much good will I feel for it, it simply cannot become
> my de-facto office suite and allow me to let go of MS's teats.
>
> Twayne`

I hope that you take the time to submitted or comment on these issues as
bug reports or RFE's.  It would be much more productive to the whole
community.

http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html

--
Robin Laing

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Lars Nooden]

Robin Laing wrote:

> Do you have RFE's or Bug numbers for reference?  If they are not
> reported, they cannot/will not be fixed.

@Twayne:
The UI for the bug reporter is absolutely tedious.  However, even though
it's in the way, it's what's there.  Most, if not all, of these bugs
have been reported and if you find and post the URL for the bugs, then
it's much easier for list members to add their vote and comments.

Regards
/Lars

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Twayne-2]

"Lars Nooden" <larsnooden@...> wrote in message
news:4AC8D774.9090002@...

> Robin Laing wrote:
>
>> Do you have RFE's or Bug numbers for reference?  If they are not
>> reported, they cannot/will not be fixed.
>
> @Twayne:
> The UI for the bug reporter is absolutely tedious.  However, even
> though it's in the way, it's what's there.  Most, if not all, of
> these bugs have been reported and if you find and post the URL for
> the bugs, then it's much easier for list members to add their vote
> and comments.
>
> Regards
> /Lars

I agree with your Lars, and also with Robin.  In the beginning I tried
to work "within" the system for exactly that purpose.  But I think
"culture" and syntax got in the way a lot.  No matter how hard I
searched and looked, my entries always came back as "duplicates" or
"already fixed" with neither being the case IMO.  And once that
happened, getting anyone to re-look at them was fruitless - no matter
how well I tried to explain further for clarification and verification.
When I finally got a response back that I didn't need to write a book
about it, just state the problem, I quit!  And I'm still quit.
   My list of "problems" was meant to be a sampling, also.  Even if I
did decide to enter them, I wouldn't have time to do so.  The system
just doesn't work for me.  I've given up on it other than to
occasionally give my opinions here.

Regards,

Twayne`





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Robert Derman-2]

Twayne wrote:

> "Lars Nooden" <larsnooden@...> wrote in message
> news:4AC8D774.9090002@...
>  
>> Robin Laing wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> Do you have RFE's or Bug numbers for reference?  If they are not
>>> reported, they cannot/will not be fixed.
>>>      
>> @Twayne:
>> The UI for the bug reporter is absolutely tedious.  However, even
>> though it's in the way, it's what's there.  Most, if not all, of
>> these bugs have been reported and if you find and post the URL for
>> the bugs, then it's much easier for list members to add their vote
>> and comments.
>>
>> Regards
>> /Lars
>>    
>
> I agree with your Lars, and also with Robin.  In the beginning I tried
> to work "within" the system for exactly that purpose.  But I think
> "culture" and syntax got in the way a lot.  No matter how hard I
> searched and looked, my entries always came back as "duplicates" or
> "already fixed" with neither being the case IMO.  And once that
> happened, getting anyone to re-look at them was fruitless - no matter
> how well I tried to explain further for clarification and verification.
> When I finally got a response back that I didn't need to write a book
> about it, just state the problem, I quit!  And I'm still quit.
>    My list of "problems" was meant to be a sampling, also.  Even if I
> did decide to enter them, I wouldn't have time to do so.  The system
> just doesn't work for me.  I've given up on it other than to
> occasionally give my opinions here.
>
> Regards,
>
> Twayne`
>  

For ordinary users, the currant bug reporting system is worse than
worthless!  I would suspect that 95% + just give up and never try to
report any bugs using it.  If we don't toss it and replace it with
something totally different, the only way we will ever get a working bug
reporting system is to place a group of people between the ordinary
users and the bug reporting system.

[mike scott-2]

Robert Derman wrote:
....
> For ordinary users, the currant bug reporting system is worse than
> worthless!  I would suspect that 95% + just give up and never try to
> report any bugs using it.  If we don't toss it and replace it with
> something totally different, the only way we will ever get a working bug
> reporting system is to place a group of people between the ordinary
> users and the bug reporting system.
>

+1

I certainly find it more trouble than it seems to be worth -- and I
don't count myself exactly an "ordinary user", either.


--
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(mike -a-t- [deletethis]
scottsonline.org.uk)
(Processing of this email by 3rd parties in relation to advertising
services is forbidden.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Cor Nouws]

Mike Scott wrote (6-10-2009 9:47)

> Robert Derman wrote:
> ....
>> For ordinary users, the currant bug reporting system is worse than
>> worthless!  I would suspect that 95% + just give up and never try to
>> report any bugs using it.  If we don't toss it and replace it with
>> something totally different, the only way we will ever get a working
>> bug reporting system is to place a group of people between the
>> ordinary users and the bug reporting system.
>
> +1
>
> I certainly find it more trouble than it seems to be worth -- and I
> don't count myself exactly an "ordinary user", either.

But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,
invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy to
enter issues really will help the project.
  - It will result in an even larger pile of submitted issues, with on
average less quality
  - so handling will cost more resources,
  - while it will result in a small amount (compared to what we already
have) of issues that make sense,
  - while the current amount cannot be fixed/realised already,
  - and it results in less resources for resolving and QA for the real
issues (since more are needed to handle a larger stream) ...

How much I would love to see an ideal situation where each user could
easily enter issues ... real world is not like that. The product and
process are just too complicated.
But what I do like of our project, that often on the users mail list or
in the forum, people with real issues get assistance to have them filed
in IssueTracker. So that ís positive :-)

Regards,
Cor

*) Mail Thorsten Ziehm, yesterday, on dev@qa:

"
in 2008 : 37,0% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
           - duplicate   16,4%
           - worksforme    10,5%
           - invalid      8,1%
           - wontfix      2,0%

in 2009 : 32,9% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
            - duplicate  15,2%
            - worksforme  7,6%
            - invalid     8,2%
            - wontfix     1,9%
"

--
Cor Nouws
   - nl.OpenOffice.org marketing contact
   - Community Contributor Representative in the Community Council
Gevoel niet vrij te zijn? Zie www.nieuwsteversie.nl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Patrick DESAUNAY]

Dear Cor, and Others,

My feeling about the duplicate is that it would be reduced a lot if
finding equivalent bugs is simplified. Moreover, voting would be easier,
and thus probably help to set up priorities based on quality (user
experience). At this moment, the way priority is established for bug
solving is not so clear, and frankly, quite frustrating.
Moreover, sponsoring of bug solving would be easier.

Regards
Patrick

Cor Nouws a écrit :

>
> Mike Scott wrote (6-10-2009 9:47)
>> Robert Derman wrote:
>> ....
>>> For ordinary users, the currant bug reporting system is worse than
>>> worthless!  I would suspect that 95% + just give up and never try to
>>> report any bugs using it.  If we don't toss it and replace it with
>>> something totally different, the only way we will ever get a working
>>> bug reporting system is to place a group of people between the
>>> ordinary users and the bug reporting system.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I certainly find it more trouble than it seems to be worth -- and I
>> don't count myself exactly an "ordinary user", either.
>
> But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,
> invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy to
> enter issues really will help the project.
>  - It will result in an even larger pile of submitted issues, with on
> average less quality
>  - so handling will cost more resources,
>  - while it will result in a small amount (compared to what we already
> have) of issues that make sense,
>  - while the current amount cannot be fixed/realised already,
>  - and it results in less resources for resolving and QA for the real
> issues (since more are needed to handle a larger stream) ...
>
> How much I would love to see an ideal situation where each user could
> easily enter issues ... real world is not like that. The product and
> process are just too complicated.
> But what I do like of our project, that often on the users mail list
> or in the forum, people with real issues get assistance to have them
> filed in IssueTracker. So that ís positive :-)
>
> Regards,
> Cor
>
> *) Mail Thorsten Ziehm, yesterday, on dev@qa:
>
> "
> in 2008 : 37,0% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
>           - duplicate   16,4%
>           - worksforme    10,5%
>           - invalid      8,1%
>           - wontfix      2,0%
>
> in 2009 : 32,9% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
>            - duplicate  15,2%
>            - worksforme  7,6%
>            - invalid     8,2%
>            - wontfix     1,9%
> "
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Dr. Cadwell]

Good Day Folks:
    While I do not often post I joined this list to learn and help where
I could. I too agree that thee bug tracking system is untenable. Over
the past three years I have attempted to report s, count 'em 6 issues,
two in just the past year. At _/*NO TIME*/_ was I able to even find a
way to post the issue, much less  actually succeed in doing so. While I
am a middling above average user, the frustration factor is so high that
it is 99.999% certain that pertinent issues are never seen because we
simply give up and hope that someone else can wade through the PIA
nonsense. I like OO and I was sad to see what a mess 3.0 was as it
caused me to revert back to Ver. 2.3.0 as it still worked and let me at
the files I saved instead of locking the files and me out of my own
files. If I had been able to post that I might have stayed with the
newer OO. I, like many others need to be able to not only post a bug
issue but to find answers when we can. While I admit the discuss list is
a real help my ISP filters out such sites like OO, Slashdot, Bit
Torrent... I'm sure you see the pattern. Oh yeah, Dial- up connections
make it hard to do a download. You might also want to be aware if you're
on *A*ll *T*wits& *T*urkeys your dial up download will get progressively
slower until it starts dropping packets and then file corruption ...  
Good Luck, I hope that someone finds a reasonable compromise. I'm sure
it won't be me.

In Service & In Health,
Dr. Cadwell
 Healers' Heart - ret.

Patrick Desaunay wrote:

> Dear Cor, and Others,
>
> My feeling about the duplicate is that it would be reduced a lot if
> finding equivalent bugs is simplified. Moreover, voting would be
> easier, and thus probably help to set up priorities based on quality
> (user experience). At this moment, the way priority is established for
> bug solving is not so clear, and frankly, quite frustrating.
> Moreover, sponsoring of bug solving would be easier.
>
> Regards
> Patrick
>
> Cor Nouws a écrit :
>>
>> Mike Scott wrote (6-10-2009 9:47)
>>> Robert Derman wrote:
>>> ....
>>>> For ordinary users, the currant bug reporting system is worse than
>>>> worthless!  I would suspect that 95% + just give up and never try
>>>> to report any bugs using it.  If we don't toss it and replace it
>>>> with something totally different, the only way we will ever get a
>>>> working bug reporting system is to place a group of people between
>>>> the ordinary users and the bug reporting system.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I certainly find it more trouble than it seems to be worth -- and I
>>> don't count myself exactly an "ordinary user", either.
>>
>> But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,
>> invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy
>> to enter issues really will help the project.
>>  - It will result in an even larger pile of submitted issues, with on
>> average less quality
>>  - so handling will cost more resources,
>>  - while it will result in a small amount (compared to what we
>> already have) of issues that make sense,
>>  - while the current amount cannot be fixed/realised already,
>>  - and it results in less resources for resolving and QA for the real
>> issues (since more are needed to handle a larger stream) ...
>>
>> How much I would love to see an ideal situation where each user could
>> easily enter issues ... real world is not like that. The product and
>> process are just too complicated.
>> But what I do like of our project, that often on the users mail list
>> or in the forum, people with real issues get assistance to have them
>> filed in IssueTracker. So that ís positive :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cor
>>
>> *) Mail Thorsten Ziehm, yesterday, on dev@qa:
>>
>> "
>> in 2008 : 37,0% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
>>           - duplicate   16,4%
>>           - worksforme    10,5%
>>           - invalid      8,1%
>>           - wontfix      2,0%
>>
>> in 2009 : 32,9% of all defects cost only resources (invalid, dubs...)
>>            - duplicate  15,2%
>>            - worksforme  7,6%
>>            - invalid     8,2%
>>            - wontfix     1,9%
>> "
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Thorsten Behrens-3]

Cor Nouws wrote:
> But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,  
> invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy to  
> enter issues really will help the project.
>
> [...]
>
Hi Cor,

I concur with Patrick & others that artificially limiting the inflow
of bugs by making the issue tracker unattractive (if you meant that)
is definitely not the right way to handle the problem of too many
bugs.

Others already commented on the duplicates, and how a more usable
tracker UI would help there; "works for me" is often a problem of
environment, and not necessarily _not_ a bug - and especially
"wontfix" should _not_ be regarded as something invalid, or
incorrect, but as a conflicting need, or different requirement
towards OOo. Also nothing I'd want to miss, in general.

That leaves "invalid" bugs - I find a ~10% loss rate on the inflow
quite acceptable, given how complex OOo is.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

[Cor Nouws]

Hi Thorsten,

thanks for writing,

Thorsten Behrens wrote (7-10-2009 11:23)

> Cor Nouws wrote:
>> But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,  
>> invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy to  
>> enter issues really will help the project.
>>
>> [...]
>>
> Hi Cor,
>
> I concur with Patrick & others that artificially limiting the inflow
> of bugs by making the issue tracker unattractive (if you meant that)

  ... making it specially unattractive :-)

> is definitely not the right way to handle the problem of too many
> bugs.

I agree. And I would not mind if it was easier to work with.
But ... are there good examples / ideas, that do not have the drawback I
mentioned?
May be divided in two categories:
- within the current infrastructure
- outside that.

> Others already commented on the duplicates, and how a more usable
> tracker UI would help there;

I saw someone writing that, but I am not convinced.

> "works for me" is often a problem of
> environment, and not necessarily _not_ a bug - and especially

more or less ..

> "wontfix" should _not_ be regarded as something invalid, or
> incorrect, but as a conflicting need, or different requirement
> towards OOo. Also nothing I'd want to miss, in general.

yes, that is true.

> That leaves "invalid" bugs - I find a ~10% loss rate on the inflow
> quite acceptable, given how complex OOo is.

duplicate is not invalid, but not valid as well.

But I see, somewhere in your lines above, 'UI'. I did not think along
that line, but had the idea people request a whole new tracker system ...
An more simple IU for quick search, would make it easier to use, yes.
And than a correct summary would also help ;-) I regularly have dups
because the summary is not complete/vague.

Hmm, tbc?
Cor




--
Cor Nouws
   - nl.OpenOffice.org marketing contact
   - Community Contributor Representative in the Community Council
Gevoel niet vrij te zijn? Zie www.nieuwsteversie.nl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Thorsten Behrens-3]

Cor Nouws wrote:
> But I see, somewhere in your lines above, 'UI'. I did not think along  
> that line, but had the idea people request a whole new tracker system ...
> An more simple IU for quick search, would make it easier to use, yes.
>
Hi Cor,

yeah, and you put it mildly -
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/query.cgi is an abomination; and the
most important fields, namely summary/description entry, are all the
way down to the bottom ...

All that stuff at the top, like type/component/status, is more than
irrelevant to the casual reporter. ;)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

[frank.schoenheit]

Hi Thorsten,

> yeah, and you put it mildly -
> http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/query.cgi is an abomination; and the
> most important fields, namely summary/description entry, are all the
> way down to the bottom ...
>
> All that stuff at the top, like type/component/status, is more than
> irrelevant to the casual reporter. ;)

Hehe. http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4254

We once had a search box at
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html which really
queried the issue database, that is, you enter one or more terms, and
all issues containing this term in the summary (not sure if we also
included description) were displayed. Effectively the same as entering
this/those term/s in the query.cgi site, in the right place.

This caused so heavy traffic on the collab.net site (at least we've been
told that the performance problems they had at this time were caused by
the pre_submission page's database querying), that we were forced to
replace the search with the one you see today, which is absolutely
useless, in my not so humble opinion.

Perhaps we should re-introduce the better search box, in multiple places
across the whole site, and see what happens ...

Ciao
Frank

--
- Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer         frank.schoenheit@... -
- Sun Microsystems                      http://www.sun.com/staroffice -
- OpenOffice.org Base                       http://dba.openoffice.org -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[bedipp]

Hi Frank, all,

Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany schrieb:

> [...]
> We once had a search box at
> http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html which really
> queried the issue database, that is, you enter one or more terms, and
> all issues containing this term in the summary (not sure if we also
> included description) were displayed. Effectively the same as entering
> this/those term/s in the query.cgi site, in the right place.
>
> This caused so heavy traffic on the collab.net site (at least we've been
> told that the performance problems they had at this time were caused by
> the pre_submission page's database querying), that we were forced to
> replace the search with the one you see today, which is absolutely
> useless, in my not so humble opinion.
>
> Perhaps we should re-introduce the better search box, in multiple places
> across the whole site, and see what happens ...

+1

If there is too much traffic, the solution must be an optimization -
either of the search algorithm or the site...

Best regards

Bernhard

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Andrew Jensen-2]

Bernhard Dippold wrote:

> Hi Frank, all,
>
> Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany schrieb:
>> [...]
>> We once had a search box at
>> http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html which really
>> queried the issue database, that is, you enter one or more terms, and
>> all issues containing this term in the summary (not sure if we also
>> included description) were displayed. Effectively the same as entering
>> this/those term/s in the query.cgi site, in the right place.
>>
>> This caused so heavy traffic on the collab.net site (at least we've been
>> told that the performance problems they had at this time were caused by
>> the pre_submission page's database querying), that we were forced to
>> replace the search with the one you see today, which is absolutely
>> useless, in my not so humble opinion.
>>
>> Perhaps we should re-introduce the better search box, in multiple places
>> across the whole site, and see what happens ...
>
> +1
>
> If there is too much traffic, the solution must be an optimization -
> either of the search algorithm or the site...
>
> Best regards
>
> Bernhard
>

There is still a search box on
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html
 - half way down the page - that searches the summary and description
fields.

Drew

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Andrew Jensen-2]

Drew Jensen wrote:

> Bernhard Dippold wrote:
>> Hi Frank, all,
>>
>> Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany schrieb:
>>> [...]
>>> We once had a search box at
>>> http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html which
>>> really
>>> queried the issue database, that is, you enter one or more terms, and
>>> all issues containing this term in the summary (not sure if we also
>>> included description) were displayed. Effectively the same as entering
>>> this/those term/s in the query.cgi site, in the right place.
>>>
>>> <snip>

>>> Perhaps we should re-introduce the better search box, in multiple
>>> places
>>> across the whole site, and see what happens ...
>>
>> +1
>>
>> If there is too much traffic, the solution must be an optimization -
>> either of the search algorithm or the site...
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Bernhard
>>
> There is still a search box on
> http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html
> - half way down the page - that searches the summary and description
> fields.
>
>

Sorry, hit the send button too soon.

Ok - IMO, the problem may be that on that same page, right at top, is a
link "proceed" in bold and green....so I'm guessing folks hit the page,
mutter because they wanted to submit an issue and don't like having
another page in the middle there, take 3 seconds to see the nice BOLD
GREEN word *proceed* and do just that. Forget about them finding the
'Did you search first' part of the page.

Drew


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Cor Nouws]

Thorsten Behrens wrote (7-10-2009 13:54)

> Cor Nouws wrote:
>> But I see, somewhere in your lines above, 'UI'. I did not think along  
>> that line, but had the idea people request a whole new tracker system ...
>> An more simple IU for quick search, would make it easier to use, yes.
>>
> yeah, and you put it mildly -
> http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/query.cgi is an abomination; and the
> most important fields, namely summary/description entry, are all the
> way down to the bottom ...
>
> All that stuff at the top, like type/component/status, is more than
> irrelevant to the casual reporter. ;)

Happily the page for entering an issue, is much easier.

Cor


--
Cor Nouws
   - nl.OpenOffice.org marketing contact
   - Community Contributor Representative in the Community Council
Gevoel niet vrij te zijn? Zie www.nieuwsteversie.nl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[frank.schoenheit]

Hi Drew,

> Ok - IMO, the problem may be that on that same page, right at top, is a
> link "proceed" in bold and green....so I'm guessing folks hit the page,
> mutter because they wanted to submit an issue and don't like having
> another page in the middle there, take 3 seconds to see the nice BOLD
> GREEN word *proceed* and do just that. Forget about them finding the
> 'Did you search first' part of the page.

Fixed.

Ciao
Frank

--
- Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer         frank.schoenheit@... -
- Sun Microsystems                      http://www.sun.com/staroffice -
- OpenOffice.org Base                       http://dba.openoffice.org -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Twayne-2]

"Lars Nooden" <larsnooden@...> wrote in message
news:4AC8D774.9090002@...

> Robin Laing wrote:
>
>> Do you have RFE's or Bug numbers for reference?  If they are not
>> reported, they cannot/will not be fixed.
>
> @Twayne:
> The UI for the bug reporter is absolutely tedious.  However, even
> though it's in the way, it's what's there.  Most, if not all, of
> these bugs have been reported and if you find and post the URL for
> the bugs, then it's much easier for list members to add their vote
> and comments.
>
> Regards
> /Lars

Hmm, that might be a good idea to try out.
  Trouble is, when I don't find a particular one, I'll want to submit it
and the whole thing that pissed me off will start all over again.  I
seem incapable of not being complete when I start someting,
kunfortunately.
   There has been enough incouragement though, I may wall give it a try.
I'll see what kind of time I can find to do it.

Cheers,

Twayne`




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...

[Robert Derman-2]

Bernhard Dippold wrote:

> Hi Frank, all,
>
> Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany schrieb:
>> [...]
>> We once had a search box at
>> http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/pre_submission.html which really
>> queried the issue database, that is, you enter one or more terms, and
>> all issues containing this term in the summary (not sure if we also
>> included description) were displayed. Effectively the same as entering
>> this/those term/s in the query.cgi site, in the right place.
>>
>> This caused so heavy traffic on the collab.net site (at least we've been
>> told that the performance problems they had at this time were caused by
>> the pre_submission page's database querying), that we were forced to
>> replace the search with the one you see today, which is absolutely
>> useless, in my not so humble opinion.
>>
>> Perhaps we should re-introduce the better search box, in multiple places
>> across the whole site, and see what happens ...

Many times I have thought that OOo should dump Collab.net for another
vendor.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-help@...