On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Winfried Donkers <w.donk...@dci-electronics.nl> wrote: > Norbert Thiebaud wrote (25 februari 2012 11:26) > >>#define RC_LABFMT_BEGIN (RC_ENVELP_BEGIN + 50) >>-#define RC_LABFMT_END (RC_ENVELP_BEGIN + 59) >>+#define RC_LABFMT_END (RC_ENVELP_BEGIN + 62) >> ... >>why the shuffling of constants here ? > > These constants give the ranges for UI-constants (controls, text > labels, etc.). I have added two text labels and two input fields to > the label dimensions tab in the label wizard dialog. These fout did > not fit in the range provided, so I had to enlarge the range, with the > consequence that all ranges after LABFMT had to be moved as well.
ok [...] > With hindsight it would probably have been better to make a constant for > this colour. It is not good practice to leave such colour definitions in > the code. yes, my point exactly :-) It is not too late to do the 'Right Thing'(tm) including in master. > > > I hope my explanations will help you. I not, please say so. yes, but the mix of various changes leading to such a big patch and especially the removal of entry peppered in the middle of a massive re-formating makes that, even with some diff + sed magic, I cannot reduce that to something readable, so I cannot review it. In order for _me_ to sign-off for 3.5 branch, I would need you to break your patch along the lines discussed earlier... But hey, maybe someone else will review and sign-off as is... Norbert _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice