On 22.06.2010 16:52, Philipp Lohmann wrote:
Hi,
On 6/22/10 2:49 PM, Bernd Eilers wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
That's exactly what Stephan said: bureaucratic humbug.
Well I know we do have some members in an
implement_as_you_want_when_you_want_and_dont_care_about_qa-needs_roadmaps_or_documentation
camp but I didn´t really expect you two to be in there ;-)
Name calling aside: what about issues concerning extensions ? Right
now I have to move the target from the correct "milestone 1" of an
extension to "3.3" or some such to satisfy EIS. Which is kind of
bogus. However the CWS should be "3.4" or some such since that marks
into which repository code line the CWS will get integrated.
one of the objective of extensions was to have an Office independent
release schedule. This automatically leads to an own issue tracking and
own repository, from my point of view we even can have a simplified
development process, since all the cws handling was introduced not to
break office code. So I would leave it to the developers of the
extension whether they want to have cws or another model. Sane
extensions can't break office code !
Extensions, please break out of the Office workspace,
Just my 2 cents, pl
+2 cent,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tools.openoffice.org
