Re: [Libreoffice] l10ntools clean-up?

On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 09:26 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> Unless there's someone who screams "but all this should go away in the 
> next couple months, anyway!" I would therefore go ahead and clean that 
> code up, ridding it of any tools dependencies (should hopefully not be 
> too difficult to base it either on sal or even on the plain C++ standard 
> library).

l10ntools is nearly the only consumer of ByteStrings (including
inheriting from ByteStrings, yippee) left in core, if l10ntools drops
its uses of ByteStrings then ByteString itself can finally go.

So, I'd be a fan of a two-stage pass where ByteString gets removed first
and that pushed so we can remove the rest of ByteString while the rest
of the refactoring is going on :-)

C.