[Libreoffice] [REVIEW-3-5-0] Revert of UNO interface publishing

[Norbert Thiebaud]

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 09:46 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>>
>> in the original commit by thorsten 9and not 'fixed by Stephan's)
>> --- a/offapi/com/sun/star/drawing/framework/ConfigurationChangeEvent.idl
>> +++ b/offapi/com/sun/star/drawing/framework/ConfigurationChangeEvent.idl
>> @@ -35,8 +35,9 @@ module com { module sun { module star { module uno {
>> interface XInterface; }; };
>> module com { module sun { module star { module drawing { module framework
>> {
>> -published interface XConfiguration;
>> -published interface XResourceId;
>> +interface XConfiguration;
>> +interface XConfigurationController;
>> +interface XResourceId;
>>
>> that sound weird... and is more than unpublishing
>
>
> Kai's original commit removed the unused forward declaration for
> XConfigurationController, which is harmless if brought back in.
>
>
>> diff --git a/offapi/com/sun/star/rendering/StrokeAttributes.idl
>> b/offapi/com/sun/star/rendering/StrokeAttributes.idl
>> index 8bb12d8..5393872 100644
>> --- a/offapi/com/sun/star/rendering/StrokeAttributes.idl
>> +++ b/offapi/com/sun/star/rendering/StrokeAttributes.idl
>> @@ -28,6 +28,14 @@
>> #ifndef __com_sun_star_rendering_StrokeAttributes_idl__
>> #define __com_sun_star_rendering_StrokeAttributes_idl__
>> +#ifndef __com_sun_star_rendering_PathCapType_idl__
>> +#include<com/sun/star/rendering/PathCapType.idl>
>> +#endif
>> +#ifndef __com_sun_star_rendering_PathJoinType_idl__
>> +#include<com/sun/star/rendering/PathJoinType.idl>
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +
>>
>> that does not look right either
>
>
> Kai's original commit removed the unused inclusion of PathCapType and
> PathJoinType, which are harmless if brought back in.
>
> I'm not happy with this, either, but all the additional changes brought in
> with Thorsten's commits appeared to me to be minuscule and harmless, so I
> would not bother to clean them up further, at least not on -3-5-0.

Well since we _are_ going to put some change, we might as well put as
least of change as possible...
and since there is already 2 patches, it would make sens to combine
these 2 patches anyway to keep it clean... so a few more fixup won't
hurt...

if there is another ACK, I will merge the 2 proposed patches and
revert the 2 chunk above and push that to 3-5-0 as a single commit

Norbert