Hi B. S. I am simply a user of LibreOffice, not a developer.
The tone of the original post on this thread was rather brusk. How do you envision undo to function as opposed to how it currently functions (mechanisms please -- not just results)? How should a block of changes to be undone be defined? This level of discourse was lacking in what was taken to be a rant. Vinegar was there but honey was not. BTW, you did send a long diatribe to the list which means it went to "everybody." No, the Pope and Prime Minister of The Netherlands probably did not see it so literally speaking you didn't send it to everybody. The first response addressed your tone and stated the reality (like it or not) about things getting changed by *developers* who may not find the requested change (which in this instance was not identified) to be of immediate interest to them. Developers of Open Source projects like LibreOffice are oftentimes users of the software themselves. In general there is no hierarchy of managers to assign tasks to a programmer on the project whether the programmer is interested in the task or not. The original responder also suggested that you delve into the code and submit a patch that would implement the feature that you feel is lacking. You did state in a later post that you are a software developer so aside from the size and complexity of the project that ought not to be such a daunting task. Other posts by you seem to imply that you are only interested in performing development work if you are paid money for doing so. I truly hope I misunderstood that. The spirit of FOSS development is entirely different. Nobody is suggesting that you kiss the ring on the developers' hands. Simply state _how_ undo in Writer can be made better. Hopefully that will lead to a rational discussion and result in an even better product for everybody. Ranting and threatening will accomplish little if any good. -- Jim -----Original Message----- From: "B.S." <l...@xenhideout.nl> To: Users <users@global.libreoffice.org> Sent: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:35 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] undo functionality Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 22:10: > :) Funny enough I almost did the same but out of respect for your > choice to keep things private, I chose not to. You've not given the > same consideration so: That's funny indeed. > Heads up to this user - he has zero respect for the community, enjoys > wasting everyone time, and wants to use the list as a means to waste > everyone's time with a long novel (which I rightfully ignored). He > clearly just is using a user support thread for a free and open source > project powered by incredible volunteers as a means to complain and > whine. Let's explain a little what those statements mean, because it is easy. First, you are assuming dreadfully wrong intent with everything I have written. That is usually a way to disqualify contributions when you have no real arguments to do so. Secondly, I did not send that long novel to everyone, so you are wrong again, and attributing something to me, that I clearly consciously avoided doing in the first place. Great for that. Secondly again, you are doing that thing: embellish your own position in a way to discredit my own. Not only do you have to state, you feel, to treat my attempts here as lacking any merit, but also that my intent is for them to not have any merit. So that thing I just asked you to do: to assume good intent, well, let's just say that you are a bit of a hard learner in that sense. Not a problem. But still what happens. You must discredit my entire person to keep support here from other people on this list. And at the same time, you must slime with those other people, and state how great you think they are, because I just said that you have rather low regard for them. We call this "damage control mode". I don't think you are all that good at it, but all the same, it is just what is. Hence all those smiles, and those "warmest regards". They are just a slight bit insincere, but that doesn't matter, it's the idea or the thought that counts, right? > I stand by what I said - the product works for tens of millions of > users, I use it daily for professional work, and I have zero will to > read a multi-page rant from a verbose user that likes going WAY off > topic. He seems to have a lot more time to waste than I do. Completely ignoring the topic at hand yourself. By your logic, because something "works" for millions of people, apparently it works "all the time". Or, similarly or conversely, it never fails to work for them. After all, it is just some blanket statement. A car may work for millions of people too, even if it breaks down every 20 miles. Depends on your definition of "working" doesn't it? Further more, it says nothing about things that might be improved, or things that might be individually lacking. It is just a way of avoiding that subject. And actually I have no time to waste.... but a good reason why I am doing so regardless ;-). Let's call it being destroyed by some people and having a lacking ability to express myself tersely as a result. In any case, you have zero will to begin with, and that was my point. Regards. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
