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 Expected behavior: Merged cell Sheet2.A1:B1 contains 1 Merged cell Sheet2.C1:D1 contains 2 Cell Sheet2.E1 contains 3 Actual behaviour: 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: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugHunting_Session_3.5.0.-1 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 3.5.1.1 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.
Version: 5.3.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: c89294233b6a9ffc1bd75e6e9226ad723b7d5538 CPU Threads: 2; OS Version: Linux 3.16; UI Render: default; Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8) Same behavior. 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! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
Repro 6.3+.
Repro 7.0+.
*** Bug 131385 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Versión: 6.4.1.2 (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 Calc: CL The bug is still present.
Dear Stephan van den Akker, 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 https://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://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
😥
Bug is still present in: Version: 7.4.0.0.alpha0+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 59af0be9fbfcef4e157a74099a6aef0c60facb36 CPU threads: 16; OS: Linux 5.16; UI render: default; VCL: kf5 (cairo+xcb) Locale: en-GB (en_GB.UTF-8); UI: en-GB Calc: threaded
Created attachment 186324 [details] Screen after paste special I cannot repor in: Version: 7.6.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 98cf5157d69d9f1692be7f2cac958b1dfb387ca9 CPU threads: 6; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19044; UI render: default; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-US Calc: CL threaded It shows me the following after the paste special dialog.
I will close this one since I am unable to reproduce it in: Version: 7.6.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 1d532b15472f42bda831c5404f78f92725e66e83 CPU threads: 16; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19044; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-US Calc: CL threaded Feel free to open it again if my testing was wrong.
(In reply to Andreas Heinisch from comment #16) > I will close this one since I am unable to reproduce it in: > Version: 7.6.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community > Build ID: 1d532b15472f42bda831c5404f78f92725e66e83 > CPU threads: 16; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19044; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: > win > Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-US > Calc: CL threaded > > Feel free to open it again if my testing was wrong. FWIW, if you are basing that on your screenshot from attachment 186324 [details] in comment 15, then that's not how the report was presented: your screenshot shows pasting down, whereas the steps are pasting right-ways. Having said that, I think we cannot call the current behavior a bug. The values from cells A1, A2 and A3 from Sheet1 are pasted into cells A1, A2 and A3 in Sheet2. In order to see the second value, just unmerge Sheet2.A1:A2. I am aware of the "do not paste formatting" matter, but then someone will ask for the exact opposite behavior. And, there are alternative ways to obtain different results regarding merged cells. Instead, there should be a clear method to get the described desired result, but it should not be the default. The options in Paste Special have changed since comment 0 was first written, more than a decade ago. I'll leave someone else decide whether to change the status to RFE (for documentation, or for adding more options, or whatever), or to WF.