Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4CD3372EE for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 19:23:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 66301 invoked by uid 500); 9 Nov 2011 19:23:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 66194 invoked by uid 500); 9 Nov 2011 19:23:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 66185 invoked by uid 99); 9 Nov 2011 19:23:29 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:23:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [98.139.91.211] (HELO nm16-vm1.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com) (98.139.91.211) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:23:19 +0000 Received: from [98.139.91.62] by nm16.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2011 19:22:57 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.19] by tm2.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2011 19:22:12 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2011 19:22:12 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 202510.55169.bm@omp1019.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 31690 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Nov 2011 19:22:11 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1320866531; bh=WkkO9J7K8KsicFG/yXmQ4ambBzxvp6tSipz6DghIoiU=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-RocketYMMF:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=CBz/EWJDKEwi9HbQIBDQfotBt6TtMO8mA8qfLC8az8IgTlMMddMGVxQDz/BIY4theYNu6IpmCrq/2a4rSzXyaZb/04URsL7R+Gpgv50A/gIyB9B8J9tKuk7FUe6LZDebjxHA4xFzY6J03v/ybbM5scjRvatOBdaqhIgHC4Pg7n0= X-YMail-OSG: iothreMVM1lL41ICkLtwbRxO5CZEvevtTyKhjDRmVkbMjWa uuhluM_Jp6OHjbgyKf3Bji2VEJb6.opQlR_g16sW.GxkswTZgiXOtnU.6zub isrbcEgYn.BuuSFm1.5UaDlMHtdDazcalaMquhvJEYSMGidsOBFfDTLesMkc e5FhpUslw7UnfntgUqi._FajdtXe.zsBGpz1wPiJlMpjDfz7zx.pdk10SZm. Ra1DxQLlYkpoHwJ0ReAHzZJ2_9jfoNGOdzMiILK3UGdpNrx9bbDXyah9RKEp .RsmIjgVT.BgM4gzvLCFCHUf5wXHxoJUVNxwgSZQc7F5khaQprqVp6b3arQn qd2Yo3M8pnkA1.Ld132_ANRoMQoUanQNPCkJD7qq6gm1i_ryDH4.qXHbX40k yrWm0NHjtkzDsewC3hHf.U9XRd0nCqEUazXyUnT.rLCTMaFG391bzGf3poTy WnDkionrqJyegtht8XPcJsVZ_GmRPUxKFwWaOn1LuBpfwP52TDIIBg0z4tuF vvRlvyKhfqy_G_RPMihM.9qfJm7rePcCB2.HOkPEKB9uMEMrl5pI1WnvyQpU oo1JGReN2z7TS9hR2awa3xqlU.IhTVImKKsAJSw2QpCcZyiLJekA8MrpbtaK yg6TKJDkqlvelcoc6VlVj5AGlAAk6RI5U3faIwAhE Received: from [200.118.157.7] by web113504.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 09 Nov 2011 11:22:11 PST X-RocketYMMF: giffunip X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/14.0.11 YahooMailWebService/0.8.115.325013 Message-ID: <1320866531.18803.YahooMailClassic@web113504.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 11:22:11 -0800 (PST) From: Pedro Giffuni Reply-To: pfg@apache.org Subject: Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker? To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org In-Reply-To: <4EBAC80C.3020901@t-online.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I will certainly ignore it. Patches expressly submitted through our bugzilla are or our mailing list safely covered by AL2 section 5. While I *could* look at the issue and ask for permission to apply the the fix, or I *could* implement alternative fixes, I choose to work with our own community on issues that have been tested and proved here (and we are not running short on those). On the long run I think LO and AOOo will keep diverging more and more and the number of shared bugs will eventually vanish. This is my own position though. I don't pretend this to apply to others and certainly issue submitters can do their part of the homework when they submit issues by verifying if it has been solved elsewhere, what caused it and even if the author is OK with the patch being applied here: don't expect committers to do everything, we have a life too! best regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Regina Henschel wrote: > > I do not understand, why you will ignore solutions found in > LibreOffice. For example bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=115922 > has a solution in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32872. Why > do you will ignore it? > (Actually it is a simple typo FontWorkAlignmentController > -> FontworkAlignmentController) > > Even if you can not take the patch as it is, the bug report > in LibreOffice might tell you the reason of the problem and > it might contain valuable comments and test documents. > > Kind regards > Regina >