Bug report requests for Fedora build of OpenOffice.org software

[Bob Kline]

The other day while I was running oocalc in the FC4
distribution of the OpenOffice.org suite the program
crashed and a dialog message came up stating that "OOo
has crashed ..." and requesting that I send a bug
report with the displayed information.  Assuming that
the request was from the OpenOffice.org team, I filed
a bug report with them, taking the time to provide a
substantial amount of supporting information.  I
received back a terse request that I file bug reports
against the latest, not the production version of the
software I am running.  When I wrote back to point out
that I wasn't a beta tester, and that I had only filed
a bug report because they had asked me to, they
retorted that it wasn't their software that had
crashed, and made it very clear that they don't want
bug reports for derived versions of their software
which they didn't build themselves.  I wrote back and
apologized for having bothered them, thinking that the
dialog box requesting the bug report had been put up
by the OOo team, rather than the Fedora team, and I
promised that I would pass along to the Fedora team a
suggestion that your build should not be requesting
bug reports for builds of OOo created by the Fedora
team.  So that's what I'm doing.

Bob Kline

(Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense for developers
to turn down carefully prepared feedback on problems
in their software, no matter where it's built.  I'm
just passing on what I was told by the OOo team. 
Sorry!)



	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Peter Arremann]

On Tuesday 18 October 2005 19:25, Bob Kline wrote:
>  (Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense for developers
>  to turn down carefully prepared feedback on problems
>  in their software, no matter where it's built.  I'm
>  just passing on what I was told by the OOo team.
>  Sorry!) 
Bob,

it is very unfortunate that you had to go through this. Most OSS users 
eventually end up with this problem. 

For one or another reason a distribution repackages code and then the upstream 
providers will not help you out. Happened in the past with kde, the kernel, 
ooo, cdrecord and many many others. 

There is usually a good reason for what the distributions do - make things 
look or behave differently, resolve conflicts or fix bugs that aren't fixed 
upstream yet. The upstream package providers don't like that because they 
don't appreciate others changing the code and then being asked for help. 

Unfortunately for the user, since you got the software for free you end up and 
both sides point fingers at the other, you end up without support. 

I know none of this really helps other than show you that you're not alone. 
The only thing I can do is recommend that next time before you spend too much 
time troubleshooting you verify that someone is actually willing to help you 
out. Of course, if you have more time and are capable of comparing the 
upstream and the fedora version your help will probably be much more 
appreciated. 

Peter.

[David Hollis]

On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 19:40 -0400, Peter Arremann wrote:
>  On Tuesday 18 October 2005 19:25, Bob Kline wrote:
>  > (Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense for developers
>  > to turn down carefully prepared feedback on problems
>  > in their software, no matter where it's built.  I'm
>  > just passing on what I was told by the OOo team.
>  > Sorry!)
>  
>  Bob,
>  
>  it is very unfortunate that you had to go through this. Most OSS users 
>  eventually end up with this problem. 
>  
>  For one or another reason a distribution repackages code and then the upstream 
>  providers will not help you out. Happened in the past with kde, the kernel, 
>  ooo, cdrecord and many many others. 
>  
>  There is usually a good reason for what the distributions do - make things 
>  look or behave differently, resolve conflicts or fix bugs that aren't fixed 
>  upstream yet. The upstream package providers don't like that because they 
>  don't appreciate others changing the code and then being asked for help. 
>  
>  Unfortunately for the user, since you got the software for free you end up and 
>  both sides point fingers at the other, you end up without support. 
>   
The finger pointing aspect from support is certainly not isolated to OSS
alone.  It's extremely common in the commercial world as well (Oh, you
are running with that other piece of software installed??  OOooooh,
that's not a supported combination!  etc).


I can understand their rationale that they can't support the software if
it was built by a different vendor due to the higher exposure nature of
OO, though depending on what the nature of the problem you reported, it
could really be a cop-out.  A bigger issue as I see it for support is
that FC4 is running a fairly dated beta build (1.9.125 looks to be the
most current in updates) and the OO team is currently on RC3 so they may
not want to spend too much time investigating the problem since it could
be very well have been fixed already.

So the question sort of comes down to - with the actual 2.0 release of
OO due out real soon, will new builds be put out for FC4 users or will
they have to wait for FC5?


-- 
David Hollis <dhollis(a)davehollis.com&gt;

[Strong]

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:40:35 -0400 Peter Arremann <loony(a)loonybin.org&gt;
wrote:
>  For one or another reason a distribution repackages code and then
> the
>  upstream providers will not help you out. 
First, thanks Peter for explanation on
how things are going on with the
package developers and their relation on our bug reports of their
products.

but the question arises, How to live farther? Or, in other words. What
is the distribution that can be used in order to get help from the
package developers?

Thank You for You answer.

PS Assuredly, multiple distributions is a Great Evil!

-- 
Best regards,
Strong.

[Jeff Vian]

On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 22:10 +0300, Strong wrote:
>  On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:40:35 -0400 Peter Arremann
> <loony(a)loonybin.org&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > For one or another reason a distribution repackages code and then the
>  > upstream providers will not help you out.
>  First, thanks Peter for explanation on how things are going on with the
>  package developers and their relation on our bug reports of their
>  products.
>  
>  but the question arises, How to live farther? Or, in other words. What
>  is the distribution that can be used in order to get help from the
>  package developers?
>  
>  Thank You for You answer.
>  
>  PS Assuredly, multiple distributions is a Great Evil!
>   
This is true only if you WANT to be told exactly what you can and cannot
have and how to use it.

Multiple distributions is a result of the freedom to choose what to make
available (distributors) and to choose what to use (users).

Also, note that you are not locked into using only what is packaged in
the distribution, but can add or delete packages as you choose.

Therefore, the answer to your question is:  Install the package directly
from the developers and then you may get their support.
 
>  -- 
>  Best regards,
>  Strong.
>

[Ian Pilcher]

If you're up for it, it wouldn't be a bad idea to file a Fedora Core bug
report about this.

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com

The popup you saw should arguably be disabled in the FC build.

-- 
========================================================================
Ian Pilcher                                        i.pilcher(a)comcast.net
========================================================================

[Bob Kline]

--- Ian Pilcher <i.pilcher(a)comcast.net&gt; wrote:

>  If you're up for it, it wouldn't be a bad idea to
>  file a Fedora Core bug report about this. 
Done.

Bob Kline



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com