https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Luke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||regression
--
You are receiving this mail becaus
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Luke changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.freedesktop.or
|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Joel Madero changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jmadero@gmail.com |
--- Comment #1 from Joel Madero ---
Plea
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Luke changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.freedesktop.or
|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #2 from Luke ---
> I have nothing else to add to this sorting issue.
Joel,
This is about preventing the enhancement from causing data loss with people
upgrading the "stable" 4.2 branch. It has nothing to do with 4.2.
Also bug 45146
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #3 from Luke ---
Sorry that should read: It has nothing to do with 4.4.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoff
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Michael Meeks changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #5 from Luke ---
Michael,
I don't follow. The release plan you linked to clearly shows a planned 4.2.7
release. The current 4.2.7.rc build suffers from this serious regression, while
the 4.2.6 available for download does not.
So it
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Michael Meeks changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cl...@cup.uni-muenchen.de
--- Comment #6
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #7 from Jean-Baptiste Faure ---
(In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #6)
> Really ? the sorting change was introduced in 4.2.6 ? can you point to the
> commit ? either way - from what you see in the schedule, 4.2.7 is already
> don
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #8 from Michael Meeks ---
Well; I had no idea that this was introduced in 4.2.6 - that does seem late for
this change - somehow that completely escaped me during the discussion: I have
no clue why. Co-ordination was not ideal around t
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #9 from Jean-Baptiste Faure ---
(In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #8)
> Well; I had no idea that this was introduced in 4.2.6 - that does seem late
> for this change - somehow that completely escaped me during the discussion:
>
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #10 from Michael Meeks ---
Oh; hmm, did we not ship that in 4.3.3 - urk; so yes staying on 4.2.6 is a good
idea. I believe Andras volunteered to back-port of the conditional & old
default for this from the Collabora 4.2 branch to libr
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #11 from Luke ---
Jean-Baptiste Faure Wed Oct 8 02:28:20 PDT 2014 wrote
> "In other words, what should I answer on users mailing list when a user
says that his spreadsheets that worked fine since years, suddenly do not
work anymore?"
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #12 from Jean-Baptiste Faure ---
Kohei pushed a backport of the fix for 4.3 for bug 81633:
https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/gitweb?p=core.git;a=commitdiff;h=67f3ce3a9df2bc62db5602dd84975047c1137b92
It adds an hidden configuration opt
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #13 from Luke ---
Thanks JBF for following though with the ECS and Kohei for backporting it. I am
in the process of building 4.2.7 with the fix now.
Once has undergone testing, how can we get it released? Before anyone else says
it's
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #14 from Michael Meeks ---
> let me remind people of the rules:
this sort of language is clearly inflamatory and un-necessary. All bug fixes
bear the risk of some sort of other knock-on issue.
In fact back-porting this --feature-- t
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #15 from Luke ---
Michael,
I don't follow your logic. The rules clearly state that the "only allowed
features [are those] approved by the ESC". As this latest one was approved,
it's allowed, while the original was not. Even if ESC did
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #16 from Michael Meeks ---
> I don't follow your logic. The rules clearly state that the "only allowed
> features [are those] approved by the ESC".
I havn't read it - it seems a shaky fragment of a wiki page to build an
argument on;
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Joey Reid changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Joey Reid changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #18 from Joey Reid ---
Sorry for the double posting. I was in the process of copy/pasting my post to
review in Writer when I accidentally and prematurely sent it. And I should have
asked does single member have this authority?
When w
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
Michael Meeks changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85614
--- Comment #20 from Luke ---
I only recently became involved in this issue because I noticed a stream of Ask
LO questions about 4.3 breaking their spreadsheets. As a result, I asked a
Stanford MBA who works on spreadsheets for a living to explai
24 matches
Mail list logo
