https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #24 from Justin L ---
(In reply to Justin L from comment #22)
> I'm starting to doubt whether I should keep patches 2-5.
> Maybe they should be reverted.
I intended to do revert these, but as I tried to write the commit comme
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #23 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Justin L from comment #22)
> I had better stop here or else I will get myself into big trouble. I'm
> starting to doubt whether I should keep patches 2-5. Maybe they should be
> reverte
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #22 from Justin L ---
I had better stop here or else I will get myself into big trouble. I'm starting
to doubt whether I should keep patches 2-5. Maybe they should be reverted.
It seems like this idea of "don't load user sett
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #21 from Commit Notification
---
Justin Luth committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/e72a6a73cbcb91d6125170efd422fe0b8760e377
tdf#138544 sw LoadUserSe
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #20 from Commit Notification
---
Justin Luth committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/8466fae95acff67b25272170b49deb47146d2971
tdf#138544 sw LoadUserSe
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #19 from Commit Notification
---
Justin Luth committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/dd7825765f83d09d132d1e6138b27cb03564aae8
tdf#138544 sw LoadUserSe
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #18 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #17)
> In my opinion, disabling user-specific options should *not* apply to
> compatibility options stored in the document. It should *only* be applicable
> t
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #17 from Mike Kaganski ---
In my opinion, disabling user-specific options should *not* apply to
compatibility options stored in the document. It should *only* be applicable to
things like view position, or configured printer.
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #16 from Commit Notification
---
Justin Luth committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/a1d6701105456248f6ff39766a6699f26a8f3d60
tdf#138544 sw LoadUserSe
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #15 from Commit Notification
---
Justin Luth committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/b8d9334b9d4cc03a9b7d1e570a35e0ac6ca42338
tdf#138544 sw LoadUserSe
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Commit Notification changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard||target:7.2.0
--
You are r
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #14 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Justin L from comment #13)
> I'm trying to wrap my head around what the purpose of disabling "Load
> user-specific settings with the document" is. There are lots of settings
> that are
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #13 from Justin L ---
I'm trying to wrap my head around what the purpose of disabling "Load
user-specific settings with the document" is. There are lots of settings that
are saved in the document. Disabling "Load user-specific
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #12 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Justin L from comment #11)
> It looks like this was introduced here:
> commit cfc7cdca3424aacdc2a7d5fbf4b845e3e2ff4e6f
> Author: Vladimir Glazounov
> Date: Tue Apr 1 09:11:33 2003 +0
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #11 from Justin L ---
It looks like this was introduced here:
commit cfc7cdca3424aacdc2a7d5fbf4b845e3e2ff4e6f
Author: Vladimir Glazounov
Date: Tue Apr 1 09:11:33 2003 +
2003/03/21 20:23:22 dvo 1.62.102.4: #105712# l
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #10 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Justin L from comment #9)
> (In reply to Ernest Bywater from comment #8)
> > Please insert a Primal Scream of your choice here.
> The default to "on" when user settings are not loaded w
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Justin L changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jl...@mail.com
--- Comment #9 from Ju
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #8 from Ernest Bywater ---
Please insert a Primal Scream of your choice here. Also leave the issue shown
as RESOLVED - However, I still think there is a very minor bug in the software
somewhere.
I had reset the User Profile a
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |NOTABUG
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Ernest Bywater changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|NOTABUG |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Ernes
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Status|NEEDINFO
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #5 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Dieter from comment #4)
> I did some further tests, because I had the idea, that it might depend on
> the template you use. But I couldn't reproducd.
>
> Does it also happen in Safe Mod
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #3 from Ernest Bywater ---
(In reply to Dieter from comment #2)
> I confirm this behaviour with doxc-files, but not with odt-files. If I'm
> right, you only use odt-files. The setting remains after reopening the
> document. An
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||113944
CC|
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
QA Administrators changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard|| QA:needsComment
--
You are
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138544
--- Comment #1 from Ernest Bywater ---
Now using LO 7.0.3.1 and I also just checked the updated help file on this and
find the problem appears to be a "FEATURE" by someone. In the help file on
compatibility I found this note on the compat
27 matches
Mail list logo