Re: [board-discuss] Lets sort out the patch review before continuing here (was: Merging Of Contributions)

[Paolo Vecchi]

Hi Andreas,

On 05/09/2022 17:50, Andreas Mantke wrote:

Hi all,

although I'm a bit discomposed about the process of today and the last
days I try to be as objective as possible.

Am 03.09.22 um 15:27 schrieb Andreas Mantke:

Hi all,

Am 03.09.22 um 11:24 schrieb Thorsten Behrens:

Hi Andreas, all,

Andreas Mantke wrote:

Am 02.09.22 um 18:47 schrieb Andras Timar:

Just for the record, the incriminated code is used solely by the iOS

the lool->cool change? As far as I'm concerned there aren't any. It's
good that we discussed the issue at length, and will have a vendor
neutral message handler name finally. ;)

app (Collabora Office). Are there other iOS apps that broke because of

I'd appreciate if you read my message completely. And I'd be curious if

there is common opinion among you and your colleagues. Currently I'm a
bit puzzled.

Let's please assume good intentions on all sides. TTBOMK, there's
indeed currently only Collabora providing binaries for iOS.

But honestly, that's all besides the point, and this entire thread is
dealing with the issue from the wrong end.

Andreas, can you please first and foremost interact with the reviewers
on gerrit? I'm convinced we can address all remaining questions there
& get a suitable change merged.

Sorry for the delay on Gerrit but I wasn't able to login. Thanks to
Guilhem, who fixed that for me, it works again now.

already done. As required the commit got another (better) commit message.

As you already know I submitted on August, 26 a patch to LibreOffice
core which fixes a name change. This name change was done about five
month before and changes the naming from 'lool' to 'cool'. This name
change breaked the connection from the LibreOffice Online repository and
its downstream consumers. It also changed the naming from a vendor
neutral to the naming of a commercial OSS company.

The patch was tested by Jenkins without any issues. Then a developer
with review permissions gave a +2 and marked the patch ready for
integration.

Because nobody with ther permission to merge the patch took care of the
patch and submitted it to the core repo I asked about the procedure with
volunteer patches some days later here (and on the developer list too).

I got the message then that the commit message is not okay, because it


Then after some more comments on Gerrit one developer edited my patch.
This patch reverted my changes and added totally different lines of code
to the patch set. The commit message wasn't changed. This totally new
patch set was reviewed by the author of the new patch set, marked ready
for integration and merged.

This developer didn't asked me, if I'm fine with the new patch.

Nevertheless the merged patch is marked as signed by me. The new patch
didn't revert the naming change, done about five month ago. The changed
naming to 'cool' stayed in the LibreOffice core repository and it is not
yet clear, if and when this line will be removed ever.

In addition the new patch breaks the connection to two downstream
consumer projects and to the LibreOffice online repository too.

This new patch was merged as signed by me. I wasn't asked if I was fine
with the new patch and I never signed this new patch (and are not fine
with it).

didn't reflect the code change. I amended the commit message as requested.

thanks for your summary of the events which, by reading emails and comments in gerrit, seems accurate.

I see this as a violation and ask TDF to de-merge the patch.

SlideShow.prototype.exitSlideShowInApp = function()
{
    if (window.webkit !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers.lok !== undefined)
window.webkit.messageHandlers.lok.postMessage('EXITSLIDESHOW', '*');
    // FIXME remove this in a follow-up commit
    if (window.webkit !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers.cool !== undefined)
window.webkit.messageHandlers.cool.postMessage('EXITSLIDESHOW', '*');

    if (window.webkit !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers !== undefined &&
        window.webkit.messageHandlers.lool !== undefined)
window.webkit.messageHandlers.lool.postMessage('EXITSLIDESHOW', '*');
}

Not being a developer I can't judge if there is a violation of any rules (BTW are there any standard rules?), maybe others can check the sequence of events and tell us if that's the best way to manage these situations. I haven't been involved directly in development for the past 20+ years but following the logic of the patch that has been pushed through, which doesn't fix Andreas issue, this kind of makes sense to me:     // FIXME notify the community about the standardisation to lok and remove in 6 months I thought that the developer that pushed through and merged the current patch could have thought about it to fix the original requests but if it helps then please do merge it in.

In addition: in my opinion there is much space for improving the
interaction with volunteer developers inside the LibreOffice community.
But maybe this only my opinion and everyone else is fine with the
current process.

Maybe it was just a misunderstanding and the delay in answering back due to the fact that you couldn't login into gerrit might have led some to believe that you didn't want to interact with the issue and the proposed changes. I'm sure everyone involved will look objectively at what happened and will help in improving communication and processes.

Regards,
Andreas

Ciao

Paolo

--
## Free Software Advocate
## Plone add-on developer
## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog

--
Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature