Bug#581179: oowriter 3.2 loads all linked images on first save (regression)
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 08:14:25PM +0200, Bernard Jungen wrote:
> not in 3.2. I don't have more feedback. Expecting all users to have new
> versions installed regularly is just nuts.
I don't. If I would, OOo wouldn't be in debian stable at all - as over the lifecycle
of stable you always would have the old release.
> > There is no way to add something on the bug page,
>
> Bad luck then. And bad bts too.
Nope. Other btses don't have them either on their overview page for the bugs
in one package.
> > and if oyu usewd reportbug
> > *would* have been presented them.
>
> Mandatory use of reportbug is another untold rule that any user reporting
No one said reportbug was mandatory. Not me. I just said that reportbug
would have told you what you missed.
> As for common sense, which one? Yours? A maintainer's? Are users supposed to
> have the "common sense" to know where to report the bugs? "Common sense"
Yes. I expect them to have.
> would dictate to follow the "Don't file bugs upstream" bit on the generic
> page, wouldn't it?
Not everything mentioned everywhere makes sense.
And my *personal* opinion is that everything in the debian bts is a waste
for big packages like OOo.
> As for the rule about the choice between oo.org and debian bts, expecting users
> to download and install the oo.org version before deciding is nuts.
I didn't say you should. (Would be nice, though, but...) If the bug doesn't apply
upstream (with the same test doc), you get the bug closed upstream instantly anyway..
> > > Yeah do it then instead of bitching about it, that will be more efficient.
> >
> > Just that it would make http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=openoffice.org even more longer and blurry than it's right now
>
> Long and blurry? Why? I don't think so.
I do. It's too long and it's impossible to go through anymore already.
> > - and If upstream
> > doesn't handle it it will just stay there for infinity - see for how long
> > some of the Forwarded bugs are there..
>
> That would be their problem, not yours. You're just a maintainer, aren't you?
It's my problen because it would be equally around here in the debian bts.
> > Besides that, you are the best to talk to upstream. Instead of me
> > who doesn't know what you want by 100%, should I communicate with them? Or
> > is it better you did and can tell them what you want (playing proxy
> > in such things is combersome and looses momentum and sometimes even infos)
>
> On the plus side, maintainers have more credibility and can confirm that the
> bug is indeed probably not distro-specific.
True. Then please send me a testdoc with files and I'll see.
(Which you should have done with your initial post in any case.)
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: D03E3E70
`- Fingerprint: E12D EA46 7506 70CF A960 801D 0AA0 4571 D03E 3E70
Reply to: