How to reproduce:
Create new spreadsheet
Fill cells Sheet1.A1:C1 with unique numbers, e.g. 1 to 3
Merge cells Sheet2.A1:B1 and Sheet2.C1:D1
Select cells Sheet1.A1:C1 and select Edit | Copy
Select cell Sheet2.A1 and select Edit | Paste Special...
In Dialog "Paste Special" unselect "Paste all" under Selection
In Dialog "Paste Special" unselect everything except "Numbers" under Selection
In Dialog "Paste Special" press OK
Merged cell Sheet2.A1:B1 contains 1
Merged cell Sheet2.C1:D1 contains 2
Cell Sheet2.E1 contains 3
Merged cell Sheet2.A1:B1 contains 1
Merged cell Sheet2.C1:D1 contains 3
Cell Sheet2.E1 is empty
[This is an automated message.]
This bug was filed before the changes to Bugzilla on 2011-10-16. Thus it
started right out as NEW without ever being explicitly confirmed. The bug is
changed to state NEEDINFO for this reason. To move this bug from NEEDINFO back
to NEW please check if the bug still persists with the 3.5.0 beta1 or beta2 prereleases.
Details on how to test the 3.5.0 beta1 can be found at:
more detail on this bulk operation: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RFC-Operation-Spamzilla-tp3607474p3607474.html
Bug is still there.
Tested in LOdev 3.5.0
Build ID: 7362ca8-b5a8e65-af86909-d471f98-61464c4
on openSuSE 11.4 32-bit
I see the effect with "LibreOffice 22.214.171.124 German UI/Locale [Build-ID: 45a2874-aa8c38d-dff3b9c-def3dbd-62463c8] on German WIN7 Home Premium (64bit), but I can't tell whether it's a bug, although the result is unexpected also for me.
@Stephan van den Akker
You did some chin-ups to get the undesired result, can you explain why you did exactly so? Can you cite Help, manuals or similar that let expect other behavior?
@Rainer Bielefeld: Good questions.
Copying cell content without formatting is something I use a lot. It is an invaluable part of a workflow that re-uses heavily formatted sheets with new data.
Writer actually behaves in the way i would expect and prefer for Calc (see "Expected behavior" in my original post).
But, then Calc's help on merging cells says:
"You can select adjacent cells, then merge them into a single cell. Conversely, you can take a large cell that has been created by merging single cells, and divide it back into individual cells.
When you copy cells into a target range containing merged cells, THE TARGET RANGE GETS UNMERGED FIRST, then the copied cells are pasted in. If the copied cells are merged cells, they retain their merge state." (capitalization mine)
I guess the second paragraph is trying to tell me to expect the actual behavior, but it still doesn't make sense to me. It just seems to me that the user is exposed to the implementation details of merging.
I would prefer and expect merged cells to behave as a single cell, just as the first help paragraph says and just like in Writer. I like programs with little or no exceptions to their own base rules (just like a good Sci Fi movie...).
How do other speadsheets do it:
Excel 97, Excel 2007, Gnumeric: Error message, whining about the target range not being compatible with the copied content. No copying possible...
Calligra Tables: same as present behavior of Calc
So, to recap, my arguments to change Calc's behavior:
1: I expect merged cells to behave as 1 cell
2: Writer does it the way I prefer: Calc is behaving inconsistenly
3: Calc's behavior is unexpected for you too (that makes 2 out of 2).
But basically, it comes down to taste and consistency. What do
other users expect?
(In reply to comment #4)
> But, then Calc's help on merging cells says:
> When you copy cells into a target range containing merged cells, THE TARGET
> RANGE GETS UNMERGED FIRST, then the copied cells are pasted in. If the copied
> cells are merged cells, they retain their merge state." (capitalization mine)
I think this explains that just doing Paste (and not paste special) results in
Sheet2.A1 = 1, B1 = 2 and C1 = 3
> So, to recap, my arguments to change Calc's behavior:
> 1: I expect merged cells to behave as 1 cell
> 2: Writer does it the way I prefer: Calc is behaving inconsistenly
> 3: Calc's behavior is unexpected for you too (that makes 2 out of 2).
> But basically, it comes down to taste and consistency. What do
> other users expect?
I think this is a useful idea.
Build ID: c89294233b6a9ffc1bd75e6e9226ad723b7d5538
CPU Threads: 2; OS Version: Linux 3.16; UI Render: default;
Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8)
I'm not sure why this is an enhancement and not a bug. Having 1 value just missing entirely on a paste seems like a strange default behavior (wrong) but...I won't change it. If someone else thinks it should be changed I suspect:
Minor: Can slow down but won't prevent high quality work;
Lowe: Default for minor bugs seems appropriate
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding **
To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.
There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.
If you have time, please do the following:
Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/
If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
Please DO NOT
Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not
appropriate in this case)
If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/
2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword
Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa
Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!
*** Bug 131385 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Versión: 126.96.36.199 (x64)
Id. de compilación: 4d224e95b98b138af42a64d84056446d09082932
Subprocs. CPU: 8; SO: Windows 10.0 Build 18363; Repres. IU: GL; VCL: win;
Configuración regional: es-ES (es_ES); Idioma de IU: es-ES
The bug is still present.