Including a patch from AOO...

[Lionel Elie Mamane]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 06:53:45PM +0200, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:

> given that the entirety of the patch is:

(... one line)

> Just reproduce it and mention i119400 in the commit message.

> Note: in this specific case removing the unnecessary '()' [ indeed A
> && (B && C) <=> A && B && C ]
> would be enough to make a distinct enough implementation, should
> someone insist on the un-realistic concept that such patch rise to the
> creativity threshold.

IMHO, does not rise to creativity threshold. But if you consider it
does, you can't just make *another* change on top of it and consider
you didn't take their patch.

What you'd have to do is a clean-room implementation: take a LibO
developer / contributor that has not seen this patch yet, tell him "in
function BLAH, on line N, the if-test-condition is wrong. It should
act if bTryMerge is true and pMergeWithAction is non-NULL and
pMergeAction->Merge( pAction ) is true / non-NULL. But currently it
act if bTryMerge is true (OK, so far so good) AND
(pMergeWithAction is NULL OR
 pMergeAction->Merge( pAction ) is false / NULL
)
which is equivalent to
bTryMerge is true AND
(pMergeWithAction is non-NULL AND
 pMergeAction->Merge( pAction ) is true / non-NULL
)

So could you please change this if test as explained above? Thanks.

-- 
Lionel