'Re: Missing ODF features -- bugs or wishes'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List: koffice-devel
Subject: Re: Missing ODF features -- bugs or wishes
From: Pierre Stirnweiss <pstirnweiss () googlemail ! com>
Date: 2010-03-26 10:15:33
Message-ID: af76e3dc1003260315s4679a170k20056d6a8c9628d1 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

Let's all try now to stop adding comments like "you said; you did; in this
other occasion you...". They don't relate to the problem at hand and only
bring stress and frustration on the table. If everybody try to have the last
word in these, then the problem will never be solved. It seems there has
been at least a "you did" by nearly everybody now, so let's say everybody
had his go at it.

I am for the moment a bit confused about exactly what everybody is talking
about.
It seems to me that a couple of people are speaking about the way for
external people to formally "request" features for koffice. Meaning the
"request" is initially and formally targeted at the developers.
And it seems that Thomas is speaking about setting up something where people
would put ideas for koffice, so anyone could grab them and start working on
them.

Even if the two overlap for a large part, there is a slight difference which
is actually very important. In the first case, a formal request have been
made to the identified developers "owning and accountable for" the code.
There is in that case an expectation from the person posting the wish of the
"core developers" for an answer.
In the second case, this formal link between the "user" and the "core
developers" isn't present, and to my mind, shouldn't be present.

To me, these two cases are different and should be handled differently. The
question also being do we want to allocate resources (do we have resources)
to set up the second scenario?

Pierre

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

Let&#39;s all try now to stop adding comments like &quot;you said; you did;=
 in this other occasion you...&quot;. They don&#39;t relate to the problem =
at hand and only bring stress and frustration on the table. If everybody tr=
y to have the last word in these, then the problem will never be solved. It=
 seems there has been at least a &quot;you did&quot; by nearly everybody no=
w, so let&#39;s say everybody had his go at it. 
 I am for the moment a bit confused about exactly what everybody is talk=
ing about. It seems to me that a couple of people are speaking about the=
 way for external people to formally &quot;request&quot; features for koffi=
ce. Meaning the &quot;request&quot; is initially and formally targeted at t=
he developers. 
And it seems that Thomas is speaking about setting up something where peopl=
e would put ideas for koffice, so anyone could grab them and start working =
on them. Even if the two overlap for a large part, there is a slight=
 difference which is actually very important. In the first case, a formal r=
equest have been made to the identified developers &quot;owning and account=
able for&quot; the code. There is in that case an expectation from the pers=
on posting the wish of the &quot;core developers&quot; for an answer. 
In the second case, this formal link between the &quot;user&quot; and the &=
quot;core developers&quot; isn&#39;t present, and to my mind, shouldn&#39;t=
 be present. To me, these two cases are different and should be hand=
led differently. The question also being do we want to allocate resources (=
do we have resources) to set up the second scenario? 
 Pierre

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 