incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From TJ Frazier <>
Subject Re: Two documents that had issues with OOo 3.3.0
Date Thu, 05 Jan 2012 19:01:39 GMT
Hi, Marco, Rob,

The usual practice at OO.o (I've done it myself) is to file an issue, 
mentioning that you have confidential files to show it. Then, when 
someone picks up the issue, they say, "Send me the files to my private 
address." The dev keeps the file private, and usually isolates the bug 
so that no file is needed, or a simple, public file will show the bug.

On 1/5/2012 11:01, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marco A.G.Pinto<
>>  wrote:
>>   Hello!
>> I have two documents which had issues with OOo 3.3.0:
>> - A .DOCX one whose image in the header (I wrote "footer" by mistake a
>> week or so ago) appears stretched.
>> - A DOC which only allows to edit a few fields since it is password
>> protected and OOo asks for the password
>>    when we open the document and doesn't allow to edit the fields.
>> I sent the DOCX to Rob Weir since I didn't know where to send it to, but I
>> didn't receive any reply.
> I see you sent this response to a post I made:
> But the ooo-dev list strips attachments.
>> Is there someone to whom I can send both documents? Please notice that
>> they are classified documents and I can't share them with the mailing list.
> As Pedro mentioned, attachments can be made to Bugzilla issues.  That is
> how we track bug reports.  If the full document is classified, then you
> will want to reproduce the same bug in a new, unclassified document,
> something that can be shared.
> (A thought for the PPMC:   Note that in exceptional cases we do accept
> confidential documents on private lists.  For example a security
> vulnerability report can come with a test document that demonstrates the
> vulnerability.  Such documents are received on our security list, verified,
> but not made public.  There is a level of trust between the security team
> and the reporter to treat such information sensitively.
> If we wanted to, we could have a similar practice with documents indicating
> other kinds of errors, non-security.  Although it is easy for us to say
> that Marco should reproduce the error in a clean document, etc., the fact
> is this is often not possible.  For example, when the bug is related to
> importing a document that was created in an earlier version of OOo, or even
> created in another application, one that the reporter does not have
> installed.  I think only a small number of users will take the extra step
> to create a new test file for us. The net result is we fail to get some
> perfectly valid bug reports, and miss the opportunity of fixing some real
> bugs.)
> -Rob
>> Thanks!
>> Kind regards,
>>         >Marco A.G.Pinto
>>           -----------------------
>>   --

View raw message