From: James McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:14:09 -0700
> Maho and myself have build several versions of OOo 1.9, and I would > expect by now that these patches have worked back into the master > workspace, most notably IZ 42998, which has been open for quite some > time now. Sorry? I do not understand what you wrote. Especially, what does "have worked back into the master workspace" mean? > I think that Maho is trying to make public what he is doing to show > what he did to build OOo 1.9 milestones successfully. Instead of > placing a bunch of files in an obscure location, he is using CVS to > make his work available and this is easier than downloading the same > files over and over again. You do not understand me. I really appreciate what Maho, you, Eric B. and other MacOS X builders do. But building is not enough! You should think in the long run and bring your changes/patches/whatever *back* to the project. Instead of "placing a bunch of files in an obscure location" or "using CVS repository in an obscure location" you can and *SHOULD* use child workspace in the right location (OOo CVS server) and ask others to verify the changes in it and together get it *integrated* back. As you said, issue #i42998# is very good example: http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=42998 The issue was filed on "Feb 17 2005". This is 6 months ago! 6 months! No other porting team has a bug that is "must have" opened for such a long time. Only MacOS X builders are using the patch from it for such a long time *without* an idea when it can come back to the source. This is at least non effective! I'm again pointing at this. In the past I sent one kick-off mail. This is another one. -- Pavel Janík printk("Illegal format on cdrom. Pester manufacturer.\n"); -- 2.2.16 fs/isofs/inode.c --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
