issues here? 97 conversion seems to slip something in. (injects weirdness, ie xml ebooks gets blank pages.)
I think it's int 10; handing line feed is wonky in other format conversions. E-BOOKS : SF+Fantasy novels comics by Kevin Williams https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/packrat2 -novels (cartoons, sf+fan) http://packrat.comicgenesis.com -comics http://www.youtube.com/area163 -film ------ Always remember kiddies, that Mickysoft *IS* the great satan. Monsanto is just evil. On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:00 PM, < [email protected]> wrote: > Send Libreoffice-qa mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Libreoffice-qa digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Question regarding bug workflow (Philippe Jung) > 2. Re: Question regarding bug workflow (V Stuart Foote) > 3. Re: Question regarding bug workflow (V Stuart Foote) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 19:21:39 +0200 > From: Philippe Jung <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Libreoffice-qa] Question regarding bug workflow > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Hi, > > I have questions regarding bug/fix workflow. From my understanding, > developers and QA wiki pages provide only partial answers. > > To make it simple, I have a bug. Its status is NEW. I produced a patch > to fix the problem. > > ---- > > I updated it by setting "Assigned to:" with my email and changing status > to ASSIGNED. (And I guess I should have done it as soon as working on > the bug). > > It is not clear that I have to make these two changes, one page dealing > of easyhack (Development/Easy_Hacks) mentions changing "Assigned to" > email but not changing status > > ---- > > I push the patch to gerrit. > Who changes the status to resolved and when? > A scheme on wiki QA/BSA/BugReport_Details suggests that ASSIGNED becomes > RESOLVED when "Development is finished". Does development finished > includes code review, merged into master... ? > > ---- > > Maybe not (only) QA related: > Who commits from Gerrit into master ? > In which release ? > How QA team knows the bug has to be verified ? > > ---- > > Regards > Philippe > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 08:02:42 -0700 (MST) > From: V Stuart Foote <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Question regarding bug workflow > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > @Philippe, > > Your patch for tdf#34555 > <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34555> "Make > cropping > handles for images (as in Draw/Impress) available for all LibreOffice > applications" is sitting in the Code review queue in Gerrit. > > https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/15541/ > > Depending on its merit and successful code review by other developers, it > may or may not be merged. If there are issues, whomever reviews it will > comment in gerrit and may ask your for changes, or make suggestions as to > what needs to be corrected. It is up to you to track its status, and > collaborate with the other devs on completing its merge. > > When the final patch is merged, the commit should be automatically > reflected > in the TDF bugzilla. Then, after some review by other users all seems > acceptable--you as the assigned developer should close the issue as > resolved > fixed. > > Good luck, and thank you for taking the time to tackle the issue. > > Stuart > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Question-regarding-bug-workflow-tp4147378p4147380.html > Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 08:14:47 -0700 (MST) > From: V Stuart Foote <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Question regarding bug workflow > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Sorry, forgot to mention that if/when it is merged from Gerrit, you should > add a a note in the BZ issue whiteboard, e.g. > target:5.0.0 ( ref > > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Fields/Whiteboard/Advanced#target > ) > > If you feel the patch should be ported back to a prior branch-- you will > need to check out that branch from git and adjust/apply your patch to > that > code base--and if you have successful build and correct function locally > thenpush it to Gerrit for code review. > > When "backporting" should expect a more rigorous review for complex patches > being pushed to prior released branches, that is when not submitting > against > master. > > Stuart > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Question-regarding-bug-workflow-tp4147378p4147381.html > Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Libreoffice-qa mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Libreoffice-qa Digest, Vol 46, Issue 21 > ********************************************** >
_______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: [email protected] Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
