Hi Andreas/all, On 06/09/2022 18:44, Andreas Mantke wrote:
Hi Paolo, hi all,Am 06.09.22 um 13:39 schrieb Paolo Vecchi:Hi Andreas, On 05/09/2022 17:50, Andreas Mantke wrote:(...)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).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.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.It's really not fair to turn ones commit into the opposite and sign this new patch with the original author (of the opposite).
I personally haven't understood the logic of it as I'm not a developer but I would have thought that when the involved people realised that they forgot to deal with the initial the scope of the request then they would have done something about it.
I would have also thought that there were some processes to deal with misunderstandings and disagreements between developers but even the intervention of one board member directly on gerrit didn't seem to help in clarifying things.
I'm sure he will soon realise that your fix has been forgotten and he will do his best to objectively and impartially deal with it.
How would you describe such a behavior in the 'analog' live?
I take the fifth (as some say the other side of the pond)
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: 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', '*'); // FIXME notify the community about the standardisation to lok and remove in 6 months if (window.webkit !== undefined && window.webkit.messageHandlers !== undefined && window.webkit.messageHandlers.lool !== undefined) window.webkit.messageHandlers.lool.postMessage('EXITSLIDESHOW', '*'); } 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.I think about submitting a new patch and let's see if this will not be turned into the opposite again.
Please do that. I'm sure everyone understood the situation and they'll look after you much better.
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 don't judge about this. I find the work with Gerrit sometimes not very intuitive.
You know a lot more than I do I see ;-)I thought about submitting that patch myself but I gave up before starting as it isn't a tool I ever used or that I will generally use.
I'm sure everyone involved will look objectively at what happened and will help in improving communication and processes.I think it is in the interest of the board to foster a good communication behavior inside the LibreOffice developer (volunteer and paid) group. And I hope it also a goal that every developer (independent from his role and skills) will be treated sympathetically, thus she/he felt very welcome inside the community. In addition I think it is also in the best interest of TDF/LibreOffice community to establish such behavior/environment between volunteers of different areas of contribution too. In my view there is no superior group of volunteers. All talents and a different sort of contributions are needed to drive LibreOffice and it community forward and make the project successful.
Thanks for your very useful suggestions that I'm sure will be seriously considered to improve the experience of those that make their first steps in contributing code to LibreOffice.
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
