Le Lun 5 mars 2007 16:15, Marcin Miłkowski a écrit : > Hi Mathias, > > one more possible thing to consider: there are patches which are not > seen as patches, as the patch submitter cannot change the status, and > the owner of the defect doesn't see that there is a patch, see for > example: > > http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=72724 > > This is a patch, and the chances it will be applied are quite low, as > nobody knows who is responsible for French dictionaries now. Is this > counted as a non-processes patch or a defect in the statistics?
FYI, Red Hat/Fedora (and probably others) consider OO.o the upstream for hunspell dictionnaries, and are patching all their desktop apps (not only OO.o but firefox...)to use those dictionnaries for spell checking http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/fedora/devel/x86_64/hunspell-fr-0.20060915-1.fc7.noarch.html (Fedora is sick of shipping a gazillon of different redundant dictionnaries) If OO.o can't maintain those properly (handling patches...), there is a problem BTW WRT http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=72724 : œ is really different from o+e in french, you have words with œ and others with o+e and you can't do a blanket replace (see also http://jacques-andre.fr/faqtypo/lessons.pdf) -- Nicolas Mailhot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
