[REVIEW][3-5] Re: Two Python 2.x regressions in LibreOffice 3.5.1RC1

Michael Stahl mstahl at redhat.com
Wed Mar 7 02:37:20 PST 2012

On 04/03/12 00:45, David Bolen wrote:
> I've run into two regressions (from 3.4.5) when using LibreOffice
> 3.5.1RC1 with the internal Python interpreter (though I believe it will
> affect any Python 2.x user), both apparently unintended consequences of
> an earlier Python 3 compatibility commit.

hi David,

thanks for bringing these regressions to this list; in my experience
usually QA people aren't very fond of looking at API issues.

> Specifically:
> 1. (Bug 46926) Switching to a rich comparison function for wrapped
>    object comparisons was incomplete, and essentially disabled
>    comparisons silently.  For existing code, comparisons that used to be
>    true will simply always be false.


> 2. (Bug 46859) Changes to support Python 3's "str" type being unicode
>    broke some of the class wrapping in uno.py under Python 2, so you can
>    no longer set (or even dereference) Char values without generating an
>    exception in Python 2.  (Bug 46859)


> I expect that there will be others such as myself, for which 3.5.1 will
> be the first 3.5 release used with Python, so if there's any way to
> consider these issues for inclusion before 3.5.1 final I think it would
> be useful.  If nothing else, the rich comparison fix is very modest and
> not fixable by an end user.

unfortunately it's probably too late for 3.5.1 now, but 3.5.2 is just
some weeks away.

> The uno.py case is trickier since I haven't yet proposed a full solution
> that retains Python 3 compatibility, though it does seem that as
> distributed, the wrapper should be compatible with the internal
> interpreter and the larger Python 2.x base in preference to 3.  But at
> the least, this is more easily fixable by an end user if necessary.

we have figured out a way that should work both in Python 2 and 3 (see
the comments in the bug).

> I'm new to LibreOffice development, so I apologize if this note is a
> misuse of this list, with respect to referencing existing bug reports.

oh, and it is great that you have patches for the bugs, and it would be
a good idea to mention that in the mail :)

thanks for finding these bugs and fixing them.

could you please confirm that you contribute the patches under
MPL/LGPLv3+ license?

the best way is to send a blanket mail to this list with the license for
all your past and future contributions to LO, add yourself to this wiki
page and add a link to that mail in the wiki page:



PS: please somebody review the above 2 commits and backport to

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list