On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 23:31 +0300, Andrey Turkin wrote:
> So that would be the next step? Should I squash the two patches and resubmit
> it?
Hopefully, Michael or somebody will push the pair of them.
Since we both seem to be looking at this section of the EasyHacks, can I
suggest we follow Micha
On Monday 07 February 2011 20:50:12 Nigel Hawkins wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 15:30 +, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > Perhaps you can build your patch on top of Andrey's to capture that
> > goodness ?
>
> OK. Attached.
>
So that would be the next step? Should I squash the two patches and resubmi
On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 15:30 +, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Perhaps you can build your patch on top of Andrey's to capture that
> goodness ?
OK. Attached.
> I'm busy adding a few more easy hacks to try to make such
> conflicts less likely: it can help to add your name and a date vs. an
> easy hack
Hi Nigel,
On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 14:33 +, Nigel Hawkins wrote:
> Oddly enough, I was looking at this the other day but didn't get round
> to submitting a patch because I couldn't get sw to compile (for totally
> unrelated reasons). My changes were almost identical to yours, though I
> have one
Hi Andrey,
> This is my first patch to LibreOffice so I'd be grateful for feedback on any
> issues.
Oddly enough, I was looking at this the other day but didn't get round
to submitting a patch because I couldn't get sw to compile (for totally
unrelated reasons). My changes were almost identical
Small part of one of tasks in "easy tasks" list.
This is my first patch to LibreOffice so I'd be grateful for feedback on any
issues.
Released under LGPLv3+/MPL
---
sw/inc/undobj.hxx |4 ++--
sw/source/core/undo/unnum.cxx | 16 ++--
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+
