Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens píše v Po 03. 12. 2012 v 12:53 +0100:
Based on the discussion on the IRC, I've used 'lo::' in the patch,
instead of the too generic 'api::'.
For the record, I don't like lo. First, it is redundant
("LibreOffice, well sure, I knew what I was git-cloning!!1!"),
second, it is too close to this colloquial English label for the
dumping place ... ;)
OK - so now we are getting to some _real_ bikeshedding ;-)
While nobody will be asking "what does colloquial English label for the
dumping place do in the code", the concern with "css" is real, mainly
around filters.
Regarding git cloning - my hope is that in the long run we will be able
to transit even the usage of 'com.sun.star' in the Java api and rdb and
Python and everywhere some way - and there _some_ prefix fits. I am
happy to go ahead with "lo", "uno", "bla", "ugh", or whatever that is
not widely confused with another technology - ie. no "css", "com",
"cpp"...
Can we end up with something constructive here?
Thank you,
Kendy
Context
- Re: [API] Some more cleanup ideas (continued)
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.