Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Op vrijdag 06-11-2009 om 13:31 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Juergen
Schmidt:
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Op donderdag 05-11-2009 om 21:58 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Juergen
Schmidt:
patches were removed [or reverted] again.
do you know the reasons for that?
I don't know, there must a bug in openoffice.org's "commit" command?
mmh, sounds strange
again, i think it would be more helpful if you would create a cws, work
on it as usual, test and finalize it.
That's what I did about a year ago, and we retried again half a year
ago. Just maybe I'll attempt it yet another time. Otoh, in some
circles people might say that I'm unable to learn or take a hint if
I did that.
Anyway, here it is
http://hg.services.openoffice.org/cws/layoutdialogs3
And what is more important work closely with the experts during
the development cycle.
Experts: please have a look and work closely with me on this! :-)
did i mentioned that i am no expert here, i am more interested in the
the outcome especially to use it for extensions
I think it doesn't scale very well if you work weeks or months on
the go-oo code line and provide a bunch of patches only.
As I understand it (CMIIW) the Go-oo project was not created to--and
does not exist to--give developers another repository to "work weeks
or months" and provide "patches only".
When I commit code to Go-oo, chances are that a binary will be built
from them and shipped to users within a week. Sometimes within hours.
Also, upstream often did [does?] not build ootb, and it's impossible for
me to fix the build within a reasonable time frame [ie: hours]. I
can fix the go-oo build within an hour if it's broken, if someone
doesn't beat me to it ;-)
well it's probably because you work the whole day with this repository
and that go-oo follows a different philosophy. But i don't want to talk
about this it was addressed often enough ...
I even don't like everything as it is but i accept it because of the
project rules ;-)
In my case with layout dialogs, it allowed me to get OO.o binaries
shipped with dialogs enabled for more than a year now...while upstream
cannot even build them yet?
mmh, the questions is more why. Did you expect that other make it
working? A complete cws based on hg that build and run would be probably
integrated very fast if all criteria match the rules. And keeping such a
cws upstream shouldn't be also a problem.
Possibly the fresh layoutdialogs3 builds,
let's all pray it won't have bits removed upon/after integration and
'commit' takes less than half a year this time.
I would to like to see at least or expect a complete picture how we want
handle this in the future.
That's grand, please send a patch!
no, probably not. I was thinking more about a wiki page where the
concepts are described, a spec of the new format, how to migrate
existing dialogs etc. A growing collection of important info where
people can find all the stuff they need to use it.
By the way i think you would be faster if you would implement the
dialogs new from scratch. Maybe some helper would be also helpful.
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
