Up to this point I have been using v 126.96.36.199 There, when choosing insert -> Variables -> User Fields the list of all defined fields was sorted alphabetically. However in 188.8.131.52 fields are shown in the way they are written in content.xml file.
I have a usual view there using LO 184.108.40.206 with Windows 7 Home Premium.
Can you provide a small screenshot, please?
Created attachment 104617 [details]
sorted 220.127.116.11 view
Created attachment 104618 [details]
Unsorted 18.104.22.168 view
Screenshots provided. Note, that the difference might be a feature (after all not sorting that list sounds like a valid approach), but if that's the case what is lacking is the ability to go back to older versions behaviour
Also, I checked 4.2.6 and fields were also shown not-sorted.
Created attachment 107718 [details]
ODT containing user fields "w2", "x1", "x10", "y10", and "Y1".
Tested under GNU/Linux using:
v22.214.171.124 OOO330m19 Build: 401
v126.96.36.199 OOO340m1 Build: 602
v188.8.131.52 Build ID: 3215f89-f603614-ab984f2-7348103-1225a5b
v184.108.40.206 Build ID: e183d5b
v220.127.116.11 Build ID: 2e2573268451a50806fcd60ae2d9fe01dd0ce24
v18.104.22.168 Build ID: 40ff705089295be5be0aae9b15123f687c05b0a
v22.214.171.124 Build ID: 3fd416d4c6db7d3204c17ce57a1d70f6e531ee21
v126.96.36.199 Build ID: edfb5295ba211bd31ad47d0bad0118690f76407d
v188.8.131.52.alpha0+ Build ID: e21f6e3838a64f6c2517479d021e943e2ffcab94 TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@46-TDF, Branch:master, Time: 2014-10-10_09:04:45
v3.3-4.1 all display the Selection list entries in variable name order, while v4.2-4.4 all display the Selection list entries in the order they were created. This appears to be a regression in handling as the order variables were created in is of little use to a user.
As per comment 5, status set to NEW. Summary amended for clarity. Version set to 184.108.40.206, but may date from earlier in v4.2 series. Operating system set to All. Severity set to normal, as hunting for a variable in a lengthy list can be tedious, given creation order. Tag PossibleRegression added to Whiteboard.
*** Bug 84945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Migrating Whiteboard tags to Keywords: (possibleRegression)
** 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 on a currently supported version of LibreOffice
(5.2.5 or 5.3.0 https://www.libreoffice.org/download/
If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and
your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave
a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System
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)
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: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa
Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!
the bug still exists in LO 220.127.116.11
CPU-Threads: 4; BS-Version: Windows 6.2; UI-Render: Standard; Layout-Engine: neu;
Gebietsschema: de-DE (de_DE); Calc: group