Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi,

From Björn's message:
Hmm, in the future, maybe just adding a "[very old comment]" to it could be
helpful.  But no need to retroactively seek though old translations IMHO.

Okay, won't do this then for Philipp's translations. Anyway, what
constitutes a [very old comment], would that be anything before 2001?

From Philipp's message:
But then, what constitutes an old comment? Very often I found that the
"JP with a date" comments were obviously added _after_ the original
comment.

That's interesting. How do you determine that..? By seeing that there
is a "conversation" in the comments (original comment > second comment
about a change in behaviour)? Or because pointers to bugs are usually
added later on when the product is already released? Or by some other
means?


Maybe a "FIXME: Old comment" would be a good heads-up?

I'm almost sure, not all our old code is bad, so there is probably a
need to fix /all/ of it.


Also, the comments are literally littered with "!!!!!ACHTUNG: !!!!!"
and double question marks. What should we make of that?

I'm not a fan of excessive punctuation, so I would just convert this
to "Attention!"/"Caution!"/"Warning!", whatever seems appropriate.

Astron.

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.