Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-06-28 Thread Jürgen Schmidt
On 6/29/12 3:59 AM, chengjh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC fidelity
> with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
> implementation part and delivered patch for review in
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963. Because this is just
> the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage II/III/
> code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are needed
> to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
> decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
> branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and then
> integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your comments?Thanks.

I don't see a problem here, as you can see under
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/branches/ we have already 2
branches. One AOO34 branch to maintain our 3.4 code line and a working
branch from Armin (alg/aw080) where he is working on long term
refactoring stuff etc.

Whereas I don't see demand for using a user specific separation of
branches (eg. alg) it's fine to create a development branch for bigger
changes that takes longer or which would break the master for some time.
It makes of course sens to do it on a branch.

Juergen

> 
> Reference:
> [1]Candidate Proposal:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
> [2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/
> TOC 
> 
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
> 




Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-06-29 Thread Oliver-Rainer Wittmann

Hi,

On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:

Hi,

We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC fidelity
with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
implementation part and delivered patch for review in
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963. Because this is just
the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage II/III/
code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are needed
to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and then
integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your comments?Thanks.

Reference:
[1]Candidate Proposal:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
[2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/
TOC 



In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for a certain 
feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.


In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine from my point 
of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and does not cause any problems 
as far as I can see. Thus, I am planning to apply this patch to trunk today or 
on Monday.
Thus, from my point of view this feature milestone and the following ones are 
still small enough to handle them without an additional branch.



Best regards, Oliver.


Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-06-29 Thread chengjh
Thanks to Juergen and Oliver's comments..I got points as followed:
a)If the code changes of an improvement are too many,effort is also big and
development has to be went on for long,moreover,special testing work will
be taken to cover the given function areas and impacted areas, that's ok to
create a branch for the improvement..It is better to do so.
b)If the risk and impact areas are under control,and we are confident to
ensure the quality along with that the finished scenarios are clear and
expected, it is better for us to deliver the code changes to main
stream( trunk )
directly even the deliverable is not complete.Thus QE volunteers can help
us to find out regression defects as early as possible,and also,better
feedback can be got in time.

So,the selection can be decided according to the actual project's situation
and evaluation.To the TOC Loading,we are able to deliver the code changes
to main and finish the development work stage by stage in main
directly..Any misunderstanding,please correct me.

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC fidelity
>> with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
>> implementation part and delivered patch for review in
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963.
>> Because this is just
>> the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage
>> II/III/
>> code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are
>> needed
>> to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
>> decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
>> branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and then
>> integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your
>> comments?Thanks.
>>
>> Reference:
>> [1]Candidate Proposal:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>> AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
>> [2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.**openoff**
>> ice.org/wiki/Writer/ 
>> TOC 
>> 
>> **>
>>
>>
> In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for a
> certain feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.
>
> In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
> I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine from my
> point of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and does not cause
> any problems as far as I can see. Thus, I am planning to apply this patch
> to trunk today or on Monday.
> Thus, from my point of view this feature milestone and the following ones
> are still small enough to handle them without an additional branch.
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>



-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng


Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-06-29 Thread Oliver-Rainer Wittmann

Hi,

On 29.06.2012 10:37, chengjh wrote:

Thanks to Juergen and Oliver's comments..I got points as followed:
a)If the code changes of an improvement are too many,effort is also big and
development has to be went on for long,moreover,special testing work will
be taken to cover the given function areas and impacted areas, that's ok to
create a branch for the improvement..It is better to do so.
b)If the risk and impact areas are under control,and we are confident to
ensure the quality along with that the finished scenarios are clear and
expected, it is better for us to deliver the code changes to main
stream( trunk )
directly even the deliverable is not complete.Thus QE volunteers can help
us to find out regression defects as early as possible,and also,better
feedback can be got in time.

So,the selection can be decided according to the actual project's situation
and evaluation.To the TOC Loading,we are able to deliver the code changes
to main and finish the development work stage by stage in main
directly..Any misunderstanding,please correct me.



Yes.
The team that is working on a feature can decide what is better - working on 
trunk or working on a branch.


May be we can use the "TOC enhancements" as an opportunity to figure out a good 
and accepted way to work on branches.

Thus, I am fine with both ways for the "TOC enhancements".

Best regards, Oliver.

P.S.: I have just finished my review on the recent patch for issue 119963


On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:


Hi,


On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:


Hi,

We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC fidelity
with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
implementation part and delivered patch for review in
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963.
Because this is just
the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage
II/III/
code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are
needed
to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and then
integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your
comments?Thanks.

Reference:
[1]Candidate Proposal:
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
[2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.**openoff**
ice.org/wiki/Writer/ 
TOC 

**>



In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for a
certain feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.

In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine from my
point of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and does not cause
any problems as far as I can see. Thus, I am planning to apply this patch
to trunk today or on Monday.
Thus, from my point of view this feature milestone and the following ones
are still small enough to handle them without an additional branch.


Best regards, Oliver.









Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-07-01 Thread chengjh
Oliver, Very good suggestion.That's also one of my goals.Let's take it as a
pilot to practise the way of branch development in community. After the TOC
improvement done,the actual usage of this branch will pop up to focus on
the Study and POC of Writer's Track Changes..Thanks.

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> On 29.06.2012 10:37, chengjh wrote:
>
>> Thanks to Juergen and Oliver's comments..I got points as followed:
>> a)If the code changes of an improvement are too many,effort is also big
>> and
>> development has to be went on for long,moreover,special testing work will
>> be taken to cover the given function areas and impacted areas, that's ok
>> to
>> create a branch for the improvement..It is better to do so.
>> b)If the risk and impact areas are under control,and we are confident to
>> ensure the quality along with that the finished scenarios are clear and
>> expected, it is better for us to deliver the code changes to main
>> stream( trunk )
>> directly even the deliverable is not complete.Thus QE volunteers can help
>> us to find out regression defects as early as possible,and also,better
>> feedback can be got in time.
>>
>> So,the selection can be decided according to the actual project's
>> situation
>> and evaluation.To the TOC Loading,we are able to deliver the code changes
>> to main and finish the development work stage by stage in main
>> directly..Any misunderstanding,please correct me.
>>
>>
> Yes.
> The team that is working on a feature can decide what is better - working
> on trunk or working on a branch.
>
> May be we can use the "TOC enhancements" as an opportunity to figure out a
> good and accepted way to work on branches.
> Thus, I am fine with both ways for the "TOC enhancements".
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> P.S.: I have just finished my review on the recent patch for issue 119963
>
>  On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
>> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi,

 We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC
 fidelity
 with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
 implementation part and delivered patch for review in
 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
 >.

 Because this is just
 the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage
 II/III/
 code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are
 needed
 to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
 decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
 branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and then
 integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your
 comments?Thanks.

 Reference:
 [1]Candidate Proposal:
 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
 AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning>>> confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
 >
 [2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.openoff**
 ice.org/wiki/Writer/ 
 
 >
 TOC 
 
 http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC>
 >
 **>


  In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for a
>>> certain feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.
>>>
>>> In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
>>> I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine from
>>> my
>>> point of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and does not cause
>>> any problems as far as I can see. Thus, I am planning to apply this patch
>>> to trunk today or on Monday.
>>> Thus, from my point of view this feature milestone and the following ones
>>> are still small enough to handle them without an additional branch.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng


Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-07-01 Thread chengjh
Branch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/
has been created for the TOC Enhancement.Let's exchange code changes in
this branch for the followed improvements and bugfixes of TOC. Thanks.

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:06 AM, chengjh  wrote:

> Oliver, Very good suggestion.That's also one of my goals.Let's take it as
> a pilot to practise the way of branch development in community. After the
> TOC improvement done,the actual usage of this branch will pop up to focus
> on the Study and POC of Writer's Track Changes..Thanks.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 29.06.2012 10:37, chengjh wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to Juergen and Oliver's comments..I got points as followed:
>>> a)If the code changes of an improvement are too many,effort is also big
>>> and
>>> development has to be went on for long,moreover,special testing work will
>>> be taken to cover the given function areas and impacted areas, that's ok
>>> to
>>> create a branch for the improvement..It is better to do so.
>>> b)If the risk and impact areas are under control,and we are confident to
>>> ensure the quality along with that the finished scenarios are clear and
>>> expected, it is better for us to deliver the code changes to main
>>> stream( trunk )
>>> directly even the deliverable is not complete.Thus QE volunteers can help
>>> us to find out regression defects as early as possible,and also,better
>>> feedback can be got in time.
>>>
>>> So,the selection can be decided according to the actual project's
>>> situation
>>> and evaluation.To the TOC Loading,we are able to deliver the code changes
>>> to main and finish the development work stage by stage in main
>>> directly..Any misunderstanding,please correct me.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes.
>> The team that is working on a feature can decide what is better - working
>> on trunk or working on a branch.
>>
>> May be we can use the "TOC enhancements" as an opportunity to figure out
>> a good and accepted way to work on branches.
>> Thus, I am fine with both ways for the "TOC enhancements".
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>
>> P.S.: I have just finished my review on the recent patch for issue 119963
>>
>>  On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
>>> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi,


 On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:

  Hi,
>
> We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC
> fidelity
> with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
> implementation part and delivered patch for review in
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
> >.
>
> Because this is just
> the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage
> II/III/
> code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are
> needed
> to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
> decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create a
> branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and
> then
> integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your
> comments?Thanks.
>
> Reference:
> [1]Candidate Proposal:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
> AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
> >
> [2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.openoff**
> ice.org/wiki/Writer/ 
> 
> >
> TOC 
> 
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC>
> >
> **>
>
>
>  In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for a
 certain feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.

 In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
 I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine from
 my
 point of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and does not cause
 any problems as far as I can see. Thus, I am planning to apply this
 patch
 to trunk today or on Monday.
 Thus, from my point of view this feature milestone and the following
 ones
 are still small enough to handle them without an additional branch.


 Best regards, Oliver.


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>
>


-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng


Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-08-19 Thread chengjh
Hi Oliver,

As I know,the first stage's code changes of implementing the TOC Load and
improving TOC fidelity with MS Word binary have been reviewed  by
you..Could you please apply the patch to the branch
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/?, and
then we will ask Simon to help the branch build for us.Thanks.

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM, chengjh  wrote:

> Branch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/
> has been created for the TOC Enhancement.Let's exchange code changes in
> this branch for the followed improvements and bugfixes of TOC. Thanks.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:06 AM, chengjh  wrote:
>
>> Oliver, Very good suggestion.That's also one of my goals.Let's take it as
>> a pilot to practise the way of branch development in community. After the
>> TOC improvement done,the actual usage of this branch will pop up to focus
>> on the Study and POC of Writer's Track Changes..Thanks.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
>> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29.06.2012 10:37, chengjh wrote:
>>>
 Thanks to Juergen and Oliver's comments..I got points as followed:
 a)If the code changes of an improvement are too many,effort is also big
 and
 development has to be went on for long,moreover,special testing work
 will
 be taken to cover the given function areas and impacted areas, that's
 ok to
 create a branch for the improvement..It is better to do so.
 b)If the risk and impact areas are under control,and we are confident to
 ensure the quality along with that the finished scenarios are clear and
 expected, it is better for us to deliver the code changes to main
 stream( trunk )
 directly even the deliverable is not complete.Thus QE volunteers can
 help
 us to find out regression defects as early as possible,and also,better
 feedback can be got in time.

 So,the selection can be decided according to the actual project's
 situation
 and evaluation.To the TOC Loading,we are able to deliver the code
 changes
 to main and finish the development work stage by stage in main
 directly..Any misunderstanding,please correct me.


>>> Yes.
>>> The team that is working on a feature can decide what is better -
>>> working on trunk or working on a branch.
>>>
>>> May be we can use the "TOC enhancements" as an opportunity to figure out
>>> a good and accepted way to work on branches.
>>> Thus, I am fine with both ways for the "TOC enhancements".
>>>
>>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>>
>>> P.S.: I have just finished my review on the recent patch for issue 119963
>>>
>>>  On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
 orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

  Hi,
>
>
> On 29.06.2012 03:59, chengjh wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> We have proposed to implement the loading of TOC and improve TOC
>> fidelity
>> with MS Word binary document..And now,we have finished the loading
>> implementation part and delivered patch for review in
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
>> >.
>>
>> Because this is just
>> the stage I code implementation, and more improvements within stage
>> II/III/
>> code implementation will be followed,moreover,special qe efforts are
>> needed
>> to cover the whole TOC function area and the impact areas,in order to
>> decrease the negative impacts on the main stream,we request to create
>> a
>> branch and deliver our code implementation to the branch first, and
>> then
>> integrate the final qualified code to main..How about your
>> comments?Thanks.
>>
>> Reference:
>> [1]Candidate Proposal:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>> AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning> confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
>> >
>> [2]Wiki with FS and SDD:  http://wiki.services.openoff**
>> ice.org/wiki/Writer/ 
>> 
>> >
>> TOC 
>> 
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC>
>> >
>> **>
>>
>>
>>  In general I think it makes completely sense to work on a branch for
> a
> certain feature which takes more implementation, testing etc. efforts.
>
> In this special case I am not sure, if it is needed.
> I am currently reviewing the patch for issue 119963. It works fine
> from my
> point of view. There are no open ends, it is complete and

Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-08-19 Thread Oliver-Rainer Wittmann

Hi,

On 20.08.2012 04:51, chengjh wrote:

Hi Oliver,

As I know,the first stage's code changes of implementing the TOC Load and
improving TOC fidelity with MS Word binary have been reviewed  by
you..Could you please apply the patch to the branch
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/?, and
then we will ask Simon to help the branch build for us.Thanks.



Yes, I can apply the patch.
The branch writer001 has been created 2012-07-02. May be we should think about 
to drop it and create a new one, because a lot of stuff already happened on 
trunk since the creation of this branch.


What do you think?

Should we go with a new branch?


Best regards, Oliver.


On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM, chengjh  wrote:


Branch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/
has been created for the TOC Enhancement.Let's exchange code changes in
this branch for the followed improvements and bugfixes of TOC. Thanks.


On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:06 AM, chengjh  wrote:


Oliver, Very good suggestion.That's also one of my goals.Let's take it as
a pilot to practise the way of branch development in community. After the
TOC improvement done,the actual usage of this branch will pop up to focus
on the Study and POC of Writer's Track Changes..Thanks.

[snip]



Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-08-20 Thread Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
Hi,

On 20.08.2012 08:09, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 20.08.2012 04:51, chengjh wrote:
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>> As I know,the first stage's code changes of implementing the TOC Load and
>> improving TOC fidelity with MS Word binary have been reviewed  by
>> you..Could you please apply the patch to the branch
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/?, and
>> then we will ask Simon to help the branch build for us.Thanks.
>>
> 
> Yes, I can apply the patch.
> The branch writer001 has been created 2012-07-02. May be we should think 
> about 
> to drop it and create a new one, because a lot of stuff already happened on 
> trunk since the creation of this branch.
> 

I have just made up my mind to keep branch writer001 - thx Armin for the 
discussion.

Thus, I will update branch writer001 on trunk - merging in the changes made on
trunk since branch creation. Afterwards I will apply the patch after I have
review it.

Best regards, Oliver.

> What do you think?
> 
> Should we go with a new branch?
> 
> 


Re: Request to Create a Branch for the "Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document"

2012-08-20 Thread chengjh
Sure,let's update the branch instead of creating a new one..thanks.

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 20.08.2012 08:09, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 20.08.2012 04:51, chengjh wrote:
> >> Hi Oliver,
> >>
> >> As I know,the first stage's code changes of implementing the TOC Load
> and
> >> improving TOC fidelity with MS Word binary have been reviewed  by
> >> you..Could you please apply the patch to the branch
> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/writer001/?,
> and
> >> then we will ask Simon to help the branch build for us.Thanks.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I can apply the patch.
> > The branch writer001 has been created 2012-07-02. May be we should think
> about
> > to drop it and create a new one, because a lot of stuff already happened
> on
> > trunk since the creation of this branch.
> >
>
> I have just made up my mind to keep branch writer001 - thx Armin for the
> discussion.
>
> Thus, I will update branch writer001 on trunk - merging in the changes
> made on
> trunk since branch creation. Afterwards I will apply the patch after I have
> review it.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Should we go with a new branch?
> >
> >
>



-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng