Hi Javier, On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 01:03:59PM +0100, Javier Fernandez <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25/03/13 12:17, Miklos Vajna (via Code Review) wrote: > > Miklos Vajna has posted comments on this change. > > > > Change subject: Init: Added new file IRenderer.py > > ...................................................................... > > > > > > Patch Set 1: This need some tweaks before it is merged > > > > (1 inline comment) > > > > Also, the commit message only describes what the commit does (adds a new > > file), but it does not say why it does so, or how to test it. Without that, > > it's hard to review the patch. :-) > > Well, actually, I'm not sure whether I would like to see the patch > merged now; The patches I've sent now are just the initial > implementation of the python port from java, somehow, the minimum > required to have a "launchable" wizards. > > I just wanted to have something to start discussing the best way to > implement the functionality, since the java style has some issues that > could be done in a better way in python. > > Actually, I have a bunch of additional patches to be applied on top of > such initial implementation. > > Sorry if that's not the best way to proceed, but I just needed a remote > branch to let somebody review it and continue integrating further changes.
As long as the changes are just adding new files (one new file / change), I think it's easier if you just push a single commit (adding all new files) for review. Also, gerrit is primarily for patches that are to be merged -- if these are draft patches, a prefix like [draft] in the commit message's first line or something similar would be helpful. Thanks, Miklos
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
