openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Whytock <>
Subject Re: Clarification on treatment of "weak copyleft" components
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2011 21:48:12 GMT
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
> There is no intent to hoard.  From talking to developers on this
> project I get the sense that they want to upstream patches more than
> was done previously.  But contributing a patch is no guarantee that it
> will be integrated by the other project in a timely manner.  Simply
> having it checked in by the 3rd party component, but not yet in their
> release, is also not optimal, for stability and supportability
> reasons.  Release schedules don't always sync up.

Much more of a Java developer than a C++ developer, so I don't know
how C++ linking is managed.

In Java you give a list of .jar files for the loader to use, in order
of preference; hence you can "patch" a class in a 3rd party library by
supplying your own version of that class in a library that's examined
before the 3rd party library.

Does C++ have something similar?  Such that you can supply both the
original untouched 3rd party binary library and your own binary
library that only contains the modified code?


View raw message