Hi Stephan, > So coming back to <https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/34933/>, I'm not too > excited about that hack. It's a quick-fix to work around one specific > shortcoming of the naive Windows registry mapping, but in a way that would > require that hack to stay for backwards-compatibility reasons even when/if a > more principled fix for that mapping is done.
What do you mean by that "would require that hack to stay for backwards-compatibility reasons"? Why? Do you mean that if now we handle a property without an explicit type (inside an extensible group), than this will be required in the future too? As I see config manager works on the same way for other properties which are not member of an extensible group. It's also an invalid thing, right? And also the temporary xcu file is generated by LibreOffice, so I hope nobody uses this temporarily generated xcu file as a template or something like that. Also I think that principle fix you mentioned is not something which would be allowed to push to a bugix branch, so I think it's better to make it work, if users use it. Of course you are right on that this windos registry handling can be improved. Best Regards, Tamás _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
