In fact, I introduced a few bugs into the VCL demo tool and Michael Meeks was quite (how should I put this?) direct in his feedback to me. Those inadvertent bugs got fixed very quickly by myself.
I can assure anyone reading - Collabora only cares about good quality work, and in fact if any work is pushed into the LO git repository that is substandard the other non-Collabora devs either a. fix it immediately or revert the changes, or b. have some stern words with the Collabora dev, or (I'd imagine) to Michael or Kendy.
P.S. Eventually all code Collabora writes gets pushed into the TDF's LO git repository. Maintaining incompatible branches for any length of time in insanity, and aside from the fact that contributing back to LO is the ethos of the Collabora Productivity team, it's better for them to do so in order to allow others to help maintain and enhance the code they write.
However, with proper external independent oversight this becomes moot, thank you for pointing out that oversight appears to be in place.
It sounds from what you say that all Collabora work is pushed to the LO git repos?
The developers have enough old bugs to fix: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/page.cgi?id=weekly-bug-s...
Your claim is made even more absurd by the increasing focus on catching regression bugs before they hit master: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/RegressionId...
I've never understood why government wouldn't develop their own consultants for this sort of thing, governments often have highways agencies - the modern equivalent for communications would surely be an IT agency. In the UK we have a Department of Transport but we don't have a Department of ITC, the later seems as important a part of modern infrastructure.
There's got to be a lot of moral pressure internally - for those in control - in a company like Collabora to introduce bugs given they make their money on bug fixes. It seems government wide that purchasing the software as open source and training civil servants on the code would be highly effective in securing systems for future use?
Presumably the modifications to LibreOffice will be open source, SS 3, 3.1 here http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ appear to require it?