Hi Mikhail, I have uploaded the draft specification http://specs.openoffice.org/files/documents/138/4549/Export_Password_Protected_MS_Word_File.odt . If it is convenient for you, please help us to send the notification to [email protected]. Thanks.
Best Regards, Steve Yin ------------------------------------- Symphony Common App and Performance IBM Corporation | Lotus Software Tel: 86-10-82454405 Email: [email protected] Notes: Bing BJ Yin/China/IBM Address: 2F, Ring Bldg. No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software Park, No. 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, Beijing 100193, P.R.China From: Mikhail Voytenko <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 2009-07-24 22:59 Subject: [sw-discussion] CWS wordencryption Hi Ming Fei Ja, Steve, On 07/22/09 07:55 PM, Ming Fei Jia wrote: > I remember checking in code to CWS does not need #issue. You mean this > #issue is for integration to MWS? Yes the issue is necessary to send the CWS to QA. It is no problem if no issue was used for check in, there is just a good practice to use the issue number in the comments. It allows to provide much more information related to the change. I have just opened the issue http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=103780 The CWS is now in QA. I have updated the specification regarding the password dialog related to MS document export, since I had to do a change in this part of the specification anyway. If you would like to provide more details in the specification regarding encryption mechanics, I would recommend to create a new specification, like the following one http://specs.openoffice.org/appwide/interoperability/Import_Password_Protected_MS_Office_Files.sxw Before the CWS can be integrated into the master a feature-change notification should be sent at least to the [email protected] list. Would you prefer to do it yourself or should I send it? Best regards, Mikhail. > >> Additionally it is a good practice to add issue number to the commit >> comments, like >> "#i<issue number># <text comment>" >> >> That allows in future to find the related to the change issue easily. >> >> Best regards, >> Mikhail. >> >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Steve Yin >>> ------------------------------------- >>> Symphony Common App and Performance >>> IBM Corporation | Lotus Software >>> Tel: 86-10-82454405 >>> Email: [email protected] >>> Notes: Bing BJ Yin/China/IBM >>> Address: 2F, Ring Bldg. No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software Park, > No. >>> 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, Beijing 100193, >>> P.R.China >>> >>> >>> >>> From: >>> Mikhail Voytenko <[email protected]> >>> To: >>> [email protected] >>> Date: >>> 2009-07-21 21:32 >>> Subject: >>> Re: [sw-discussion] Removed IBM(C) from IBM modified files in CWS >>> wordencryption >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Sorry for the small delay with the integration. >>> The cws was rebased on DEV300_m51, it took a little bit more time than >>> expected because of local problems with the rebase process. > Additionally >>> I had a one week vacation, that has also delayed handling of the cws. >>> >>> The only remaining task currently is to update the specification ( the >>> implementation should be reviewed by QA- or UX-engineer before ). After >>> that the cws will be ready for QA. I think the cws will get ready for > QA >>> status this week. >>> >>> By the way, which issue was used to commit the changes to the cws? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Mikhail. >>> >>> >>> On 07/11/09 05:13 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: >>>> Christian Lohmaier wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi *, >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Ming Fei Jia<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>>> Mathias, >>>>>> >>>>>> Any status update for the integration? We are free to privide any >>> support >>>>>> if needed. Thanks.? >>>>> The wordencryption cws is >>>>> * not set to public >>>> That indeed should be changed. >>>> >>>>> * is still in state "new" >>>> This is fine as we are still in the review state. >>>> >>>>> * doesn't have any dates nor target-release set >>>> This is fine also as it doesn't make sense to set any dates until you >>>> know if there is still something to be done. >>>> >>>> So I think that this wasn't the kind of status update that Ming Fei Ja >>>> expected. :-) >>>> >>>> Ciao, >>>> Mathias >>>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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] >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
