Will Libreoffice have a "LESS BUG version" in the future?

users
#1

Hi all:
Libreoffice 4.3 is coming soon, but I still fix my Libreoffice version on
4.0.6.
Why?
Because I found more and more bugs in later version.
Some new bugs even bother my daily work.
(Note: I reported some bugs, but some still there now.)
Besides, I love Libreoffice myself, but it's really embarrassing to
recommend such a buggy office suite to my friends.

Will we have a "LESS BUG version" in the future ?
Or Libreoffice still go "many new feature and many new bugs"?

Regards,
Minhsien0330

#2

minhsien0330 wrote

Libreoffice 4.3 is coming soon, but I still fix my Libreoffice version on
4.0.6.

Actually version 4.1.6 is quite good and stable. Have you tried it? If there
are serious problems from 4.0.6 to 4.1.6 you should really report them as
Regressions!

minhsien0330 wrote

Will we have a "LESS BUG version" in the future ?
Or Libreoffice still go "many new feature and many new bugs"?

It is quite difficult for the bug number to go down since the TDF strategy
is to release new LibreOffice versions every few months (and dropping the
previous stable branch). New versions mean new features and new features
mean new bugs and also new regressions.

So I think that unless the number (or allocated time) of developers that
dedicate to new features is less than those dedicated to fixing bugs, it is
not possible to reach a LESS BUG version...

Just my 2 non-dev cents...

#3

Also, although I could be wrong here, and others should feel free to
correct me, but if I understand the situation correctly, LibreOffice is
focused on adding features to the product. This means that although
there is of course also a focus on fixing as many bugs as possible, the
drive for new features will trump the drive to iron out as many bugs as
possible.

That's not a bad thing. It's just that LibreOffice has the goal of
adding features at the moment (and this may well change in the future,
of course) in order to make LO as complete as possible.

If you are more interested in stability and lack of bugs, OpenOffice is
a better choice, as I understand they are more focused on bug hunting
and not so much on new features. OpenOffice and LibreOffice both come
from the same source code, but split into two parallel development
branches, each with a slightly different focus. That is one of the
potential benefits with open source; neither one is doing the wrong
thing, just different things, and we the end user get to decide which
one works best for us.

Again, please note that this is just how I understand the current
situation, others more in the know can comment further.

Paul

#4

Paul-6 wrote

If you are more interested in stability and lack of bugs, OpenOffice is
a better choice, as I understand they are more focused on bug hunting
and not so much on new features.

Hmm..., not sure I'd agree with that at all. The Apache OpenOffice project
is pushing out revisions as quickly as they are able. And, being active in
both projects I can say that it is simply not true that Apache OpenOffice is
any more stable than LibreOffice. The Apache OpenOffice project has its own
share of code quality and functional issues in existing code and in new
features that project devs wrangle with daily.

The development model differs considerably, but both projects have moved
forward substantial enhancements, many from Apache OpenOffice get routinely
incorporated into LibreOffice. But less so going the other direction due to
Apache licensing restrictions.

Older releases of LibreOffice remain publicly available in the projects
archive server:
http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ so folks are
welcome to stay at a particular release level if they have specific issues.
Developer support of these older releases has ceased, but it is not
inappropriate to raise enhancement or bug reports against old versions as
compared to builds in the current development cycle.

Regards OPs request for "Less Bug"--i.e. "less buggy" releases, the only
way that happens is if we users participate during active development
periods--testing across the office suite, and raising valid issues as bugs,
and requesting valid enhancements for features not yet implemented or for
features that may have been removed or altered so as to be unusable.

We users should participate on either project, or both as our time and
interests permit. But at the least we must provide concise, actionable
feedback to other project participants.

So, please use an older release of either project if it meets your
needs--but please also make the effort to evaluate what continuing
development has delivered, both in function and in quality of the suites.
And then go ahead and participate.

#5

Hi :slight_smile:
It's that 3rd digit that indicates stability.

It's like the "Service Pack"s for MS programs. Many companies never
consider installing any MS programs until at least Sp1 or Sp2. Similarly
many of us keep "production machines" on earlier branches. I keep most of
my colleagues on 3.5.7 - although i do keep meaning to upgrade them to a
more recent x.x.6.

The 1st 2 digits indicates new features, new functionality, greater
innovation, greater compatibility with the ever-changing MS formats.
Although also some radical smoothing-out of quirkiness that inevitably
builds-up over time.

So more recent releases with a lower 3rd digit might well be less stable
than later releases in earlier branches.

Each person has to find their own preferred balance between innovation and
stability. This is true of most software, whoever produces it. It's why
some people jump on new gadgets and new stuff and others prefer to wait a
while. My colleagues are not "early adopters" so they are happier with
older versions.

For myself i prefer to try to use the latest versions of LO on machines i
use a lot but keep my colleagues on older versions.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#6

Hi

Paul-6 wrote

If you are more interested in stability and lack of bugs, OpenOffice

is

a better choice, as I understand they are more focused on bug hunting
and not so much on new features.

Hmm..., not sure I'd agree with that at all. The Apache OpenOffice
project
is pushing out revisions as quickly as they are able. And, being
active in
both projects I can say that it is simply not true that Apache
OpenOffice is
any more stable than LibreOffice. The Apache OpenOffice project has
its own
share of code quality and functional issues in existing code and in new
features that project devs wrangle with daily.

The development model differs considerably, but both projects have
moved
forward substantial enhancements, many from Apache OpenOffice get
routinely
incorporated into LibreOffice. But less so going the other direction
due to
Apache licensing restrictions.

Older releases of LibreOffice remain publicly available in the projects
archive server:
http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ so
folks are
welcome to stay at a particular release level if they have specific
issues.
Developer support of these older releases has ceased, but it is not
inappropriate to raise enhancement or bug reports against old versions
as
compared to builds in the current development cycle.

Regards OPs request for "Less Bug"--i.e. "less buggy" releases, the
only
way that happens is if we users participate during active development
periods--testing across the office suite, and raising valid issues as
bugs,
and requesting valid enhancements for features not yet implemented or
for
features that may have been removed or altered so as to be unusable.

We users should participate on either project, or both as our time and
interests permit. But at the least we must provide concise,
actionable
feedback to other project participants.

So, please use an older release of either project if it meets your
needs--but please also make the effort to evaluate what continuing
development has delivered, both in function and in quality of the
suites.
And then go ahead and participate.

I will not comment on AOO model but I will add to some of the very good things Stuart has written above concerning users involvement a few more thoughts.

First the notion that a project is geared more towards fixing bugs or rather more towards new features is not a good way to start. If you look at amount of cleanup of bug fixing that has been going on since 2010 you would see that we do constant and major bugfixing all the time. This is not an "or/if" situation. Also this assumes that we can dictate our contributors what to do. It is not that easy. LibreOffice devs are not employed by the Document Foundation , they get to work on what pleases them or whatrver particular bug or need they are paid to fix or meet.

Of course we have successful ways to attract developers to focus on ver specific points or issues. They are called easy hacks: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks

... but overall we cannot dictate them what to do.

On the other hand the notion of quality is managed by our release model: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan

This allows us to let a branch improve its quality while enabling the newer one to receive more features.

Is this all perfect? Of course it is not. No system is perfect ever. LibreOffice has millions of lines of code to constantly improve and at the same time must remain innovative. These are not orthogonal objectives but at the end if the day it is you and me who help make the "less bug" version. Last but not least this link might be of interest if you are curious about contributing without being technical: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA

Hope this helps,

Charles.

#7

The LO-people should stop copying behaviour of MS.

MS is no standard.
MS is not following standards.
MS is only copying standards, and adapting them to their own standards.

MS is like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZEJ4OJTgg8

:wink:

#8

That should be "fewer" bug. Use fewer if you count the item, less if
you measure. I guess LO needs a grammar checker too. :wink:

#9

Correction, MS is substandard. :wink:

#10

James,

Will we have a "LESS BUG version"

That should be "fewer" bug. Use fewer if you count the item, less if
you measure. I guess LO needs a grammar checker too. :wink:

That was ironic as I was only referring to the title of this email...

Cheers,

Charles.

#11

Hi :slight_smile:
It's not us copying them. The "Service Pack" idea is just their name for
something other people were already using.

Actually the Sp idea is a bit different from what happens with LO.

With LO it's easy to download the whole upgrade so that for new installs
you only have to install just the 1 thing.

By contrast with the Sp idea you keep using the old installer, then apply
updates and reboot, and maybe more updates and maybe more reboots and then
apply the Service Pack and reboot and more updates and more reboots and
then the next Service Pack and on and on. Eventually a new installer
appears with the SPs bundled in but then the license key becomes a
problem.

I think that's one reason people who are new to OpenSource get a bit
confused. They don't start with say,
4.1.0 and then apply tons of updates, patches and Service Packs to end up
with the 4.1.6

So maybe it is difficult for them to understand the difference between a
4.1.6 and a 4.2.0. Plus the maths challenge that
4.2 > 4.1
so it's intuitive (but wrong) that 4.2.0 'must be' greater than 4.1.6. I
don't think anyone has found a good way around that. People try using
names such as "Precise Pangolin" but that gets even more confusing.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#12

Correction, MS is following standards.
(it's a pity is that that only follow their own 'standards')

1) When will they have a release which is only for cleaning up the list of bugs? (currently *19125* bugs found with Status: UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED, NEEDINFO, PLEASETEST)

2) on-topic: When will LO release a NEW feature in their software?

#13

Hi Luuk,

You and everyone else can help here... We (QA) have to check all bugs and prepare them for devs and you can help triaging --> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugTriage#Suggested_Triage_Order

We cannot do this alone, so the answer is "When we join forces and prepare bugs for devs" (Which QA does). So we 'only' need a dev, but unless you are able to code ( and also if you are able to code) please help QA. We have a website as well: https://qa.libreoffice.org/

Liebe Grüße, / Yours,
Florian Reisinger