The letter template layout changes when imported as .docx and exported as .odf.
After reopening the .odf file, the paragraph with the date is too low.
The issue can be seen as a regression introduced by my commit
but it can be "fixed" by moving the right textbox a little and hit "undo". So there is an inconsistency between offline and online layout formatting.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. open the docx file
2. save as odf
3. close Writer
4. open odf file
Date is too low below the textbox and can be pulled back by moving the box and hitting "undo"
Date is just below the textbox
User Profile Reset: No
Introduced by commit d07fc485d46f431405a3f6a002f951a08c559677
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:59.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/59.0
Created attachment 141568 [details]
Created attachment 141569 [details]
Created attachment 141570 [details]
original rendering of the docx file in LO Writer
Created attachment 141571 [details]
rendering after opeing the ODF export
The misplaced images are already reported in
Created attachment 141611 [details]
PDF of odt-document
I can't reproduce it with
Version: 188.8.131.52.alpha0+ (x64)
Build ID: 2325f9ac789cd12e5ecc9d239baf2558e1d678bb
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: GL;
TinderBox: Win-x86_64@42, Branch:master, Time: 2018-04-05_00:37:47
Locale: en-US (de_DE); Calc: CL
Word has the option "Allow overlap", which is off for the text boxes. Therefore the boxes are effectively not on the position, which its settings say. LibreOffice does not have such options, but shapes can always overlap. So the position has to be recalculated on import to fake the position from Word.
Currently the original position from Word is simply copied.
I see the error in Version: 184.108.40.206.alpha0+ (x64)
Build ID: 8b34efff7a7ed13553dfe87cd2413d01c76dec1d
CPU threads: 8; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: default;
Locale: de-DE (de_DE); Calc: CL
> The issue can be seen as a regression introduced by my commit
> but it can be "fixed" by moving the right textbox a little and hit "undo".
> So there is an inconsistency between offline and online layout formatting.
Mark as a regression...
Created attachment 141892 [details]
another affected document
The behaviour is reproduced with the following file, where the second heading is in the middle because of the image while it should be aligned to the left.
Created attachment 141893 [details]
comparison MSO 2010 and LibreOffice 6.1
attachment 98962 [details] from bug 78651 is also affected
Hi, thanks for the feedback and other test files!
I will try to figure out why my commit introduces this regression.
Dear Patrick Jaap,
This bug has been in ASSIGNED status for more than 3 months without any
activity. Resetting it to NEW.
Please assigned it back to yourself if you're still working on this.
I just looked into this bug and I cannot reproduce it any more!
It seems to be fixed in master and in 6.1.1.
Can you find out which commit resolved this issue? I want to know who I have to thank for it!
Clarification: The Bug is fixed for my original attachment #1. The other document (attachment #6) seems unchanged. Nevertheless, I will create a unit test for my document.
Patrick Jaap committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":
tdf#117187 unit test
It will be available in 6.2.0.
The patch should be included in the daily builds available at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More
information about daily builds can be found at:
Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
(In reply to Patrick Jaap from comment #14)
> Hi Xisco!
> I just looked into this bug and I cannot reproduce it any more!
> It seems to be fixed in master and in 6.1.1.
> Can you find out which commit resolved this issue? I want to know who I have
> to thank for it!
I missed your comment.
The issue got fixed by https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=59f5f666a5085ae58a8dd164636a6bea47e6bddc
Since your commit https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=59f5f666a5085ae58a8dd164636a6bea47e6bddc fixed attachment #1, I thought you could be interested in attachment #6...