Bug#504133: Fails to unprotect table cells (not found in Sun's OO)
David wrote:
> Excuse me, but, are you drunk today? Did you sleep badly? Are you stressed
> by examinations? Do you not include enough fibre in your diet? :-)
Yes.
> My full name is in the "from" field of my email. Is it relevant for the bug?
You are named David Maillists? or did I miss your last name? ;-)
No, it's not relevant for the bug but it's good practice (-> netiquette)
to provide the full name. OK, I could have said it a bit more polite, but...
> > Why didn't you mark it appropriately then? ;-)
> > It's currently marked as found in >= 2.4.1-11 only.
> > (And 3.0.0-x is branched off 2.4.1-7)
>
>
> I chose the current testing version, because my memory is not so good to
> remember the first version in Debian. True, I could have gone to the
> developer information, but, at the time I submitted it (daybreak), I would
> have preferred not to submit it if I had to spend time in the history of the
> package. In such case, by the way, I would have avoided your rudeness :-)
Rudeness? Where? Note the smiley (also in the next paragraph).
I just pointed you to your error. But if you want to submit bugs which don't
get looked at because they are marked against a version which doesn't get that
much attention anymore...
> > Aha. And because you have written it there you can't write it
> > down in this bug, too istewad of pointing to a (waaah!) forum? ;-)
>
>
> Thanks to this forum you are looking down on we were able to found that the
> problem is specific of Go-OO. I think this is a valuable piece of
> information. Do you not think so?
Yes, it is. It just that forums are per definiton bad because of its nature
it's mostly not looked at by developers (polling vs. getting the info), so
MOST times you don't get valuable stuff from forums (been there, have that).
> > How should one reading this bug offline (bts cache) look at the infos ;-)
> > All the infos relevant to the bug belong into the bug.
>
>
> I refer again to two paragraphs above. Regard the submission of this bug as
> a courtesy to you :-P Furthermore, the title of the bug is self-explanatory
> :-P
No, it's not.
> Yes, I learnt myself that submitting to the upstream is quicker. But
> Debian's bug submitting guidelines do not say anything about that, so do not
> assume that people will guess it.
Well, actually, if you used reportbug instead of reportbug-ng the
program would have told you about this (it's a critical bug in
reportbug-nr that it doesn't)
> I already said I was NOT submitting it as grave. Calm down, kids :-P
Well, I answred what I did when you submitted it as grave. What was offending
here, please?
> > Yes, we do. Unless you can tell us why this is release-critical, why we
> > should stop the release for it - and I guess you have the fix already for
> > it?
>
>
> No, I am not such a skilled programmer.
Not that it has to do with programming, I am not a skilled programmer either.
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Reply to: