The Question is: Do we want to take action here or not?
On 17.01.19 21:19, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Marcus, > > Am 17.01.19 um 20:42 schrieb Marcus: >> Am 17.01.19 um 13:41 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Two of my commits were immediately picked by LO. [1] [2] >>> >>> Always nice to see, that down streaming still works for the fork... :-D >> sure, better then to draw this on their own. >> >> Again with a note who has tested and reviewed it - which is totally >> fine - but no hint where it comes from and who is the author. They >> still don't want to tell where they get the code from. > Not exactly, Pilot_Pirx is me... ;-) > > But now it looks like I would have committed it directly to LO, while > they just monitor aoo/trunk and take what they can use. [1] > > Regards, > > Matthias > > [1] > https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/commit/1170f10906a9bca78782df6ab1b6a4e20cf0435a > >> Is this redicioulous or just sad? I don't know. :-( >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/commit/28dee1129c7a9c4da34b9253aefd6c6b2df1a073 >>> >>> [2] >>> https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/commit/9796738e1149a99f8b3ff687b0f72264ba3a56ff >>> >>> >>> Am 14.01.19 um 16:46 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>> At this stage, I think just back porting (svn merge) to the AOO42X >>>> branch is fine. >>>> As we get close to a release, we'll need to either have an RM >>>> approve it >>>> or so something like creating a STATUS file, with a list of proposed >>>> backports >>>> and requiring at least 3 +1s to backport (ie: RTC) >>>> >>>>> On Jan 14, 2019, at 10:40 AM, Matthias Seidel >>>>> <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>> >>>>> Am 09.01.19 um 21:54 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>>> On Jan 9, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ahh... something w/ the cppuhelper stuff. Obviously, some UDK >>>>>>> issue I'm thinking... >>>>> How is the process to get commits merged from trunk to AOO42X? >>>>> >>>>> I adjusted some pointers for Windows and Linux: >>>>> >>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1851110 >>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1851111 >>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1851214 >>>>> >>>>> Additionally I updated some pointers for OS/2. I know that Bitwise is >>>>> already working on a port of 4.2.0, so they would be useful. >>>>> >>>>> Since it took me several attempts it would be easier, if I would >>>>> commit >>>>> them directly. .. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> Matthias >>>>> >>>>>> Yeppers... for sure it's the udk versioning, which is more a Linux >>>>>> thing than a macOS (or Windows) thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Will look into either hacking around it or something else. I >>>>>> thought I had fixed it. Obviously not :( >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
