https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
--- Comment #10 from Ray <cont...@anthracitelaw.com> --- Thank you! I reported a regression between 4.x and 5.x. And yes, it sounds like you fixed exactly what I asked for, so that it works as well as 4.x did. I always use a maximum text length of -1 for long fields, so I don't set the max explicitly for anything that is very large. That was a quick turnaround time too. I really appreciate it. That being said, even though it isn't a regression (I just checked, it was broken in 4.x too, and maybe earlier but I didn't check that far back), and I don't need it fixed, and I wasn't complaining about it originally, there is bug with the maximum text length field that has been there for a very long time. If the actual upper limit of maximum text length is > 500k characters, it seems that the maximum text length field ought to be able to go higher than 32767 unless there is some underlying software engineering reason it shouldn't (i.e. maybe the underlying design of the box can't enforce a max text length of > 32767 without major slowdowns, so the user should be forced to just use -1 for those). If there is an engineering reason it can't be higher than 32767 it should automatically snap back to -1 rather than its last value if someone puts in a higher number. Right now it snaps back to whatever it was before, which is what it did in 4.x. If I can give you any more information about this, or anything else, ask. Whether or not you end up fixing the other longstanding max text length box bug, you fixed the regression, and that makes the software usable for me again. I really appreciate your efforts, both on my particular bug and in general. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
