[PATCH] FILESAVE: Empty custom properties are lost while saving in .doc format

[Tarun Kumar K]

Hi Michael,

As you suggested, I have created the patch with "git commit" and put the 
bug ID "fdo#75243" in the first line of the commit message, and then 
"git format-patch HEAD~"
Kindly guide is I should do something else as well and where I can see 
action of patch-making-into-mainstream.

Thanks for the help.

Regards,
Tarun
=====================
On 03/05/2014 01:13 PM, Tarun Kumar wrote:
> Hi Michael
>
> Many thanks for the review.
>
> ....i'm not sure whether it is better or worse to store e.g. an Author 
> property that is empty; have you thought about this? ..
>
> [Tarun] In most of the big organizations, workflow systems require 
> some of the custom properties to be present which are later populated 
> via the system. For example. Once a document is prepared, it is sent 
> for review to an employee. Once the Review is done online through the 
> system, Reviewer (and Review_date) property is populated by the system 
> automatically. Similarly, once a document is approved, Approver (and 
> Approved_date) property is populated by the system. To make the 
> document (and other systems) compatible with each other, these 
> properties are to be created first and these system can then update 
> the properties.
>
> I am going to provide git patch and will also revert back to on the 
> email (once done)
>
> Regards,
> Tarun
>
> On 03/04/2014 01:51 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
>> On 26/02/14 08:07, Tarun Kumar wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The Bug is filed and accepted at: 
>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75243
>>>
>>> Steps to reproduce:
>>> 1. Open Writer and use a document .doc
>>> 2. Add it a custom property. Don't enter any value for the property
>>> 3. Save it and close Writer
>>> 4. Open again Writer and use same document recently saved.
>>> 5. Custom property is lost.
>> hi Tarun,
>>
>> agreed, custom properties should be saved even if empty.
>>
>>> Attached is a patch that solves the problem. Patch is also attached 
>>> to the bug.
>>> Please consider this patch for inclusion.
>> great, your patch fixes the problem!
>>
>> looking at sfx2/source/doc/docinf.cxx there are numerous calls (affected
>> by your patch) to the function SetStringValue with static ID, and i'm
>> not sure whether it is better or worse to store e.g. an Author property
>> that is empty; have you thought about this?
>
>> also, could you please create the patch with "git commit" and put the
>> bug ID "fdo#75243" in the first line of the commit message, and then
>> "git format-patch HEAD~".
>
> I declare that this and my further patches are under LGPLv3+ / MPL 
> license.
>
>> great, feel free to add yourself to
>>   https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Developers
>>
>> regrads,
>>   michael
>