Created attachment 118850 [details] Test page including the original and all re-imported drawings Version: 5.0.1.2 Build ID: 81898c9f5c0d43f3473ba111d7b351050be20261 Linux x86-64 A drawing is created on a "1cm/10spaces" grid and is exported into files using emf, wmf, svg and svm formats. The resulting files are afterwards added to a new gallery and placed from the gallery in the same page as the original drawing. It turns out that the re-imported emf, wmf and svg drawings are no longer on-grid but are slightly spoiled. Only the re-imported svm drawing matches the original. Please fix this issue to ensure a true export and re-import of emf, wmf and svg drawings.
Simpler test: skip the gallery steps altogether and just export selection as EMF, then drag'n'drop it back. Could reproduce. Win 7 Pro 64-bit, Version: 5.0.2.2 (x64) Build ID: 37b43f919e4de5eeaca9b9755ed688758a8251fe Locale: fi-FI (fi_FI) Version: 5.1.0.0.alpha1+ Build ID: 37d41674c2b1a706c95c2c326cbfbd06b0c1a655 TinderBox: Win-x86@62-merge-TDF, Branch:MASTER, Time: 2015-11-02_00:13:27 Locale: fi-FI (fi_FI)
** 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
I am sorry. If a bug that I had originally reported and that got confirmed by a different user is not commented by a developer to have been fixed within a year, then I have to draw the conclusion that it is not important enough to get fixed. I do not check, if this bug still exists, if there is no indication that any developer is interested in my finding. Regards Tom
As an other user, let me say that the bug report of Tom was really good. You can see on the test document that he invested time to analyze the bugs behaviour. In my opinion it's not helpful to send commited Libreoffice users like Tom, such a disencouraging mail.
Tom & Joerg: please read this to understand that we do not do these mass pings just to annoy reporters: https://www.reddit.com/r/libreoffice/comments/6wbu05/the_value_of_testing_old_bug_reports/ The rate for "silently fixed" pinged reports has consistently been around 25%. That is quite significant. For the record, I can still reproduce the bug. Arch Linux 64-bit, KDE Plasma 5 Version: 6.0.0.0.alpha1+ Build ID: 64024d7c18bd114eb9958cf80eea9129e09923bd CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 4.13; UI render: default; VCL: kde4; Locale: fi-FI (fi_FI.UTF-8); Calc: group Built on November 3rd 2017
Buovjaga, I appreciate the excellent work of the Document Foundation and its development team to provide and continuously improve the LibreOffice suite. In fact, I use LibreOffice very often. This is the reason, why I have already donated to LibreOffice and plan donations also in the future. This is also the reason, why I report issues that I consider to be significant and generally beneficial to the entire LO community. Bugzilla used by the Document Foundation is an effective tool to systematically report and track all issues of LO. I understand that especially the users of LO are responsible to clearly report any new issue so that it can be reproduced and fixed by the development team. Likewise, I expect the development team to be responsible to comment any issue that has been discarded or fixed and close these issues afterwards. However, a 25% rate of silently fixed issues suggests that the second part of the tracking process is not as effective as one would expect. I think, rather than asking the original reporters of any open issue that is older than a year to check, if the corresponding issue was resolved (by chance), it would be better to find out, why a significant rate of resolved issues is not tracked (i.e. is silently fixed). Given the root cause of this significant rate, there is the chance to make the entire bug tracking process more efficient. Regards Tom
(In reply to Tom from comment #6) > Bugzilla used by the Document Foundation is an effective tool to > systematically report and track all issues of LO. I understand that > especially the users of LO are responsible to clearly report any new issue > so that it can be reproduced and fixed by the development team. Likewise, I > expect the development team to be responsible to comment any issue that has > been discarded or fixed and close these issues afterwards. However, a 25% > rate of silently fixed issues suggests that the second part of the tracking > process is not as effective as one would expect. I think, rather than asking > the original reporters of any open issue that is older than a year to check, > if the corresponding issue was resolved (by chance), it would be better to > find out, why a significant rate of resolved issues is not tracked (i.e. is > silently fixed). Given the root cause of this significant rate, there is the > chance to make the entire bug tracking process more efficient. What you are describing is the responsibility of the QA team, which consists mostly of volunteers. A QA team member does not need to know one bit of C++. You can learn more about what we do by examining this resource: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA
Dear Tom, 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://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