To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
User mav changed the following:
What |Old value |New value
================================================================================
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution| |FIXED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Apr 9 10:34:27 +0000
2008 -------
mav->fs: No problem, bug happens. :)
Logically the listener is more related to the model than to the storage. So
since the storage must be disposed after model has disconnected from it I see no
problem to reuse the listener.
I also dislike the SolarMutex, unfortunately the SfxBaseModel implementation is
based on it. Moreover the SolarMutex usage is a result of the current sfx2
implementation. Changing this would need huge efforts. The listener should use
the same mutex as the model in this case, so until this change is done the
listener must use SolarMutex in sfx2 context. This is actually why I have asked
whether the change is acceptable for database, since it uses own mutex as I
understand.
I have commited the usage of SolarMutex to mav31 cws. So now the listener
neither takes the mutex from SfxBaseModel nor from database implementation any
more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
