Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 15:51 +0000, Phil Hibbs wrote:
That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out.  It's not always
applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is.
Even we don't do that too often.

Nonetheless, saying "it's better for us if you don't submit your
patches to OOo" is kind of like saying "Lets hope OOo don't spot this
bug/issue". It's ethically dubious. If this is the official approach,
then why not just make a clean break with OOo and not even try to
merge in any future OOo code changes with the LO code?


I'll keep it short.

* The decision should be up to the patch submitter.  We are not in a
position to tell him or her what to do.

* Since we are being asked, I took my liberty to state my prerence, and
my preference is to have the patch submitted to 

1) LibreOffice only
2) OOo only
3) both

in this order, because 3) increases our workload.  I'm making a
statement of fact.  If stating the fact is somehow unethical, I'll just
shut up and go back to handling the workload.

* I never said "Let's hope OOo don't spot this" or "OOo will stagnate
and die".  I hope people will stop putting words into my mouth.

This is all from me on this thread.

And I really hope you will join us and help us reduce this workload of
managing code, Phil.  We could use lots of help there.  No talk or
circular discussion (like this one) will.

Have a nice day.


Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.