Hi all,
although I'm a bit discomposed about the process of today and the last
days I try to be as objective as possible.
Am 03.09.22 um 15:27 schrieb Andreas Mantke:
Hi all,
Am 03.09.22 um 11:24 schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
Hi Andreas, all,
Andreas Mantke wrote:
Am 02.09.22 um 18:47 schrieb Andras Timar:
Just for the record, the incriminated code is used solely by the iOS
app (Collabora Office). Are there other iOS apps that broke because of
the lool->cool change? As far as I'm concerned there aren't any. It's
good that we discussed the issue at length, and will have a vendor
neutral message handler name finally. ;)
I'd appreciate if you read my message completely. And I'd be curious if
there is common opinion among you and your colleagues. Currently I'm a
bit puzzled.
Let's please assume good intentions on all sides. TTBOMK, there's
indeed currently only Collabora providing binaries for iOS.
But honestly, that's all besides the point, and this entire thread is
dealing with the issue from the wrong end.
Andreas, can you please first and foremost interact with the reviewers
on gerrit? I'm convinced we can address all remaining questions there
& get a suitable change merged.
already done. As required the commit got another (better) commit message.
Sorry for the delay on Gerrit but I wasn't able to login. Thanks to
Guilhem, who fixed that for me, it works again now.
As you already know I submitted on August, 26 a patch to LibreOffice
core which fixes a name change. This name change was done about five
month before and changes the naming from 'lool' to 'cool'. This name
change breaked the connection from the LibreOffice Online repository and
its downstream consumers. It also changed the naming from a vendor
neutral to the naming of a commercial OSS company.
The patch was tested by Jenkins without any issues. Then a developer
with review permissions gave a +2 and marked the patch ready for
integration.
Because nobody with ther permission to merge the patch took care of the
patch and submitted it to the core repo I asked about the procedure with
volunteer patches some days later here (and on the developer list too).
I got the message then that the commit message is not okay, because it
didn't reflect the code change. I amended the commit message as requested.
Then after some more comments on Gerrit one developer edited my patch.
This patch reverted my changes and added totally different lines of code
to the patch set. The commit message wasn't changed. This totally new
patch set was reviewed by the author of the new patch set, marked ready
for integration and merged.
This developer didn't asked me, if I'm fine with the new patch.
Nevertheless the merged patch is marked as signed by me. The new patch
didn't revert the naming change, done about five month ago. The changed
naming to 'cool' stayed in the LibreOffice core repository and it is not
yet clear, if and when this line will be removed ever.
In addition the new patch breaks the connection to two downstream
consumer projects and to the LibreOffice online repository too.
This new patch was merged as signed by me. I wasn't asked if I was fine
with the new patch and I never signed this new patch (and are not fine
with it).
I see this as a violation and ask TDF to de-merge the patch.
In addition: in my opinion there is much space for improving the
interaction with volunteer developers inside the LibreOffice community.
But maybe this only my opinion and everyone else is fine with the
current process.
Regards,
Andreas
--
## Free Software Advocate
## Plone add-on developer
## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
