Issue 20175 - Displaying build/RC version information in Help / about
Summary: Displaying build/RC version information in Help / about
Status: CLOSED WONT_FIX
Alias: None
Product: Build Tools
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.1 RC5
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Martin Hollmichel
QA Contact: issues@tools
URL:
Keywords: oooqa
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-09-26 11:49 UTC by markellse
Modified: 2013-08-07 15:35 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description markellse 2003-09-26 11:49:12 UTC
Help; About OpenOffice.org, should give full version information. 

So, with rc5 that I am currently running it should say: OpenOffice.org 1.1.0 rc5.

Reason: Makes it clear which version you are running for reporting bugs. This is
otherwise not easy to track if, like use as a school, we have loads of machines
trialling OOo. ('Which version is that? RC4 or RC5?' 'Don't know, I didn't do
the last upgrade on this machine?')
Comment 1 dankegel 2003-09-29 00:46:50 UTC
I agree; Help / About should show the build number.
It would be helpful.
Comment 2 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-22 07:41:33 UTC
FPE: About box *does* show the build number if you enter
Ctrl+S-D-T in the about box. Look for "build number" in the help index.
Comment 3 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-22 07:42:24 UTC
.
Comment 4 tamblyne 2003-10-22 10:22:47 UTC
Using CTRL + SDT to determine the build and version number is neither
intuitive nor well known.  How to get this information is an FAQ which
could be avoided by simply putting it in Help > About without the
extra required step.  

Also, using CTRL + SDT does not always provide the version -- as in
the case of 1.1rc5, which provides only the build number.  The version
 number is more useful and understandable to the average user.  

While I can't speak for Mark, I understood this to be the purpose of
the RFE -- to eliminate the need for CTRL + SDT.  

Comment 5 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-22 10:34:32 UTC
>Using CTRL + SDT to determine the build and version number 
>is neither intuitive nor well known. How to get this information is 

It's well documente in the help.

>an FAQ which could be avoided by simply putting it in Help > About 
>without the extra required step.  

The standard user will not be interested in this 
information so adding an extra step to get it is a valid procedure.

Re displaying the milestone release (Beta, RC1, 2, 3...): duplicate.


*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 20030 ***
Comment 6 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-22 10:35:05 UTC
.
Comment 7 sforbes 2003-10-22 12:36:27 UTC
>The standard user will not be interested in this 

I am not so sure about this- esp. in situations where giving remote
help (via the internet for example).

Having the information in a location where many users expect to see it
will  simplify assisting users and giving users a better user experiance.
Comment 8 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-22 14:15:50 UTC
I don't want to get too deep into a discussion here.
I'd just suggest to merge the two bugs because they are
adressing the same issue -- readily identifying the version.

Comment 9 markellse 2003-10-22 14:58:00 UTC
Agreed that the issue is documented in the help.
But it would be much simpler to have it visibly there without having
to consult the help.
KISS
Comment 10 andreschnabel 2003-10-23 19:29:57 UTC
Reopen as discussed at dev@qa and users@ooo (as this is not an duplicate).
Changed summary to show the difference.
Comment 11 derekd 2003-10-24 07:45:30 UTC
Hi Frank, can you pass this on to the proper people?
Comment 12 frank.thomas.peters 2003-10-24 07:54:25 UTC
Not a documentation issue.
Comment 13 flibby05 2005-05-19 20:31:56 UTC
reassign to 'tools'-team
Comment 14 flibby05 2005-05-19 20:36:14 UTC
Using PavelJ's m103 build #2 on Linux, i can see via Help -> About that there
already is code available for this (Build 2, $build_date).
Could this extra information also be included in _stable_ builds and release
candidates, where no easy identification such as m1xx is possible?
Comment 15 Martin Hollmichel 2005-08-10 09:54:24 UTC
set to wontfix.

a final version is created through a simple copy of rc, so it makes no sense to
require recompilation to get buid identification in.

the same applies for the additional string set by --with-build-version.

we need to think about another build identification which doesn't require
recompilation of the office.
Comment 16 Martin Hollmichel 2006-11-05 10:21:06 UTC
close issue.