On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]> wrote: > Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> [being able to fix bugs in a ooo-copied piece of software] >> >> This is one of the reasons for including copies of external libraries >> in OOo, this is one of the reasons for rejecting contributions not >> covered by the SCA. >> > Nonsense. Every piece of code OOo uses can be modified under at > least LGPL terms (or looser). There is no reason for SCA. ;)
Misses the point completely. Read the original post again. It is not being able to fix problems or not, it is about /having/ to fix problems yourself or not. Argument pro cmake was: You're not the maintainer, thus less work for you. But that is nonsense, since when you're facing a bug, you need to solve it/spend time on finding a workaround/fix/whatever. Point was maintenance burden. And if you keep patchsets to have your changes, this is a much bigger effort than if you're upstream yourself. But please don't drag this thread into politics please. ciao Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
