On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 20:04 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> What you'd have to do is a clean-room implementation
AFAIR we have such a re-implementation committed already. For legal
advice, it's best to consult a lawyer - in general, I'd prefer to keep
random legal tips off the developm
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 06:53:45PM +0200, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
> given that the entirety of the patch is:
(... one line)
> Just reproduce it and mention i119400 in the commit message.
> Note: in this specific case removing the unnecessary '()' [ indeed A
> && (B && C) <=> A && B && C ]
> wou
On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 12:07 -0700, bfo wrote:
> There are bug reports on bugs.freedesktop.org imported from AOO which
> are in RESOLVED FIXED state there. ...
There are plenty of bugs cross-linked to AOO bugs, many of them FIXED
no doubt on one side or the other. It is certainly clear th
Hi.
There are bug reports on bugs.freedesktop.org imported from AOO which are in
RESOLVED FIXED state there. Patches are commited to AOO codebase for some of
them. LO devs should reinvent the wheel to fix a fixed issues (just like
this thread is all about)? This can impact improving LO quality. Any
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Ivan Timofeev wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> a nice patch from AOO:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1350585
given that the entirety of the patch is:
--- incubator/ooo/trunk/main/svl/source/undo/undo.cxx 2012/06/15
11:40:331350584
+++ inc
nis.hamilton=acm@lists.freedesktop.org] On
Behalf Of Ivan Timofeev
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 08:20
To: michael.me...@suse.com
Cc: Michael Stahl; libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: Including a patch from AOO...
Hi Michael,
thanks for the explanations.
On 27.06.2012 13:56, Michael Meeks
Hi Michael,
thanks for the explanations.
On 27.06.2012 13:56, Michael Meeks wrote:
Please just re-implement the fix in a
different way - and/or if this is a really key-fix we can re-base that
one file in 3.6.
I am scratching my head - how could one re-implement
+ if (A && !B)
- if (A && B)
On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 11:22 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
> that makes sense in general, but (to my non-legally-trained eyes) it
> looks like this patch is so simple that it very likely doesn't meet the
> threshold of creativity that is required to be eligible for copyright
> protection in the first
On 27/06/12 10:47, Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 10:41 +0400, Ivan Timofeev wrote:
>> a nice patch from AOO:
>> Is it possible to merge this patch in our repo? And if yes, who would be
>> --author then?..
it seems they even add the mail address to the comment nowadays, which
isn't
Hi Ivan,
On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 10:41 +0400, Ivan Timofeev wrote:
> a nice patch from AOO:
:-)
> Is it possible to merge this patch in our repo? And if yes, who would be
> --author then?..
That requires the module underneath to be re-based on top of the Apache
code; which can be
10 matches
Mail list logo
