incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrea Pescetti <>
Subject Re: Nominate release blocker: 118999 - Leap year not correctly calculated
Date Sat, 03 Mar 2012 21:26:58 GMT
Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> --- Sab 3/3/12, Andrea Pescetti ha scritto:
>>> The fix should definitely be integrated in 3.4.

We already have more messages in this discussion than characters in the 
patch, anyway... By "nominating as blocker" I simply meant that the fix 
should be checked in before 3.4; seeing that Pedro had the fix ready but 
had not committed it, I merely wanted to ask to include it. (By the way, 
regressions should qualify as blockers, but I accept Marcus' view that 
this is not a huge bug, while annoying).

>> Looking at this issue:
>> I got to the conclusion that this is a long standing
>> bug that has been mutating for some time.

No, that bug is closed invalid and has nothing to do with leap years. 
This is a new bug, introduced by CWS sw33bf02, and you can read the 
description from the developer's words in
and in the same thread you can see the LibreOffice fix that is 
equivalent to the one by Pedro:

> Are we sue that fixing this bug doesn't bring in another bug?  I'd
> worry that there is other code compensating for this bug

Given the discussion above, I'd be confident that the fix can be 
committed. This is not a decade-old bug hidden in an obscure part of the 
source code, a situation where I would have the same perplexity you express.

> I'd be far more confident if we had a test document that did a
> comprehensive test of date calculations, including leap year
> calculations.

You can find reasonable suggestions (unit tests) in the discussion 
above, but indeed test documents would be nice to start with.


View raw message