undo functionality

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
Next » 12
B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

undo functionality

Seriously people,

this is the second time I have lost a great amount of work because the
undo functionality of LibreOffice is about limited to one paragraph.

The alternative to make backups every time you change something is just
not workable.

Regards,

B.S.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

B.S. schreef op 01-06-2016 15:24:
> Seriously people,
>
> this is the second time I have lost a great amount of work because the
> undo functionality of LibreOffice is about limited to one paragraph.
>
> The alternative to make backups every time you change something is
> just not workable.

And if you then make another change after trying the undo (which doesn't
really work) you will also have lost the redo buffer. I pressed the
wrong button for redo. I pressed CTRL-R (Vim shortcut). Bad me, it did a
right align, and my redo buffer was thrown out. Not that it mattered so
much at this point, that latter point.

But this is just not functional. Not if you expect people to be people
and still be able to use the thing.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

jmadero jmadero
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality


>> Seriously people,
>>
>> this is the second time I have lost a great amount of work because the
>> undo functionality of LibreOffice is about limited to one paragraph.
>>
>> The alternative to make backups every time you change something is
>> just not workable.
>
>
Are you just ranting? This isn't a question at all.

Feel free to report a concise bug at bugs.libreoffice.org - explain the
problem  and how you think it should work. I've been using LibreOffice
for years and been a contributor for that time period and no one else
has come up complaining about this.

FWIW - this is a free open source project, so volunteers tackle issues
as they want. There are no guarantees and it's a take it or leave it
situation. Of course patches are always welcome (the code is out there
to dive right into).

Best,
Joel

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Bo Siltberg Bo Siltberg
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

If you lose work because of limited undo then there is something wrong with
your method of working.
Anyhow, go into *Options -> LibreOffice -> Memory* and raise the *Undo
number of steps*.

2016-06-01 15:40 GMT+02:00 Joel Madero <[hidden email]>:

>
> Seriously people,
>>>
>>> this is the second time I have lost a great amount of work because the
>>> undo functionality of LibreOffice is about limited to one paragraph.
>>>
>>> The alternative to make backups every time you change something is
>>> just not workable.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Are you just ranting? This isn't a question at all.
>
> Feel free to report a concise bug at bugs.libreoffice.org - explain the
> problem  and how you think it should work. I've been using LibreOffice for
> years and been a contributor for that time period and no one else has come
> up complaining about this.
>
> FWIW - this is a free open source project, so volunteers tackle issues as
> they want. There are no guarantees and it's a take it or leave it
> situation. Of course patches are always welcome (the code is out there to
> dive right into).
>
> Best,
> Joel
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

Bo Siltberg schreef op 01-06-2016 19:46:
> If you lose work because of limited undo then there is something wrong
> with
> your method of working.
> Anyhow, go into *Options -> LibreOffice -> Memory* and raise the *Undo
> number of steps*.

I think people have a right to their own way of working, and you don't
have a say in that.

You allusion that the feature is unnecessary for anything real not only
decides what other people should do or not do, but clearly also states
that the ones who have implemented it in the first place, or those who
have come before and have created such features for as long as computers
exist, must clearly be in the wrong and now you know the real truth,
because it doesn't exist in LibreOffice, so that must be right.

Right?

Common sense is clearly defunct here again.

Your argument has the form of "It doesn't exist now, so you don't really
need it" as if the past choices of developers are always right, and
current complaints, never are.

And your statement really comes down to what they call bigotry, sorry to
say so. You basically say that, because some developer has not sought
fit to create it, and developers are the authority in all things, and
more bright than you and me combined, it must follow that there is then
also not a need for it.

This is not logic, but it is dependence on some authority that is always
right, no matter what. It is bigotry and depending on and believing in
the infallibility of some historical authority much like people believed
the Bible was always right and if it wasn't in the bible, it isn't so.

Now you say "It is not in the product, so you don't need it".

Regardless of that fact that pretty much every other product, that are
usually not even word processors, always do.

LibreOffice stands alone in this, completely. Speak to me of your common
sense, again.


Also there is not actually any such option in the version I use.

I could screenshot it, but yeah, it's not there in 5.1.2, of the Ubuntu
version I am using that comes with 16.04.

Regards.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

steveedmonds steveedmonds
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

Correct, there are no undo settings in my 5.1.2 from openSUSE, although
it is in the help.
steve

On 2016-06-02 07:16, B.S. wrote:
> Also there is not actually any such option in the version I use.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Bo Siltberg Bo Siltberg
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

Then try 5.0 if you need extensive undo, or simply try to find another way
of writing that does not rely in too much undo. It is clearly not meant for
reverting some hour of work.


2016-06-01 21:38 GMT+02:00 Steve Edmonds <[hidden email]>:

> Correct, there are no undo settings in my 5.1.2 from openSUSE, although it
> is in the help.
> steve
>
> On 2016-06-02 07:16, B.S. wrote:
>
>> Also there is not actually any such option in the version I use.
>>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Piet van Oostrum-2 Piet van Oostrum-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by steveedmonds
Steve Edmonds wrote:

 > Correct, there are no undo settings in my 5.1.2 from openSUSE, although
 > it is in the help.
 > steve
 >
 > On 2016-06-02 07:16, B.S. wrote:
 > > Also there is not actually any such option in the version I use.

There is an option under Advanced > Expert Configuration > org.openoffice.Office.Common > Undo
The default is 100 steps which should be enough for normal use. But you can increase it if you want.
--
Piet van Oostrum <[hidden email]>
WWW: http://pietvanoostrum.com/
PGP key: [8DAE142BE17999C4]


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by jmadero
Well then if you are going to respond like that, I am going to respond
in public.


Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 18:13:
> I use LibreOffice daily for professional work - your subjective
> feelings
> are irrelevant in this outside of imposing a common sense "duty" (as a
> member of the open source world) to report whatever issues you have in
> a
> polite way and then wait patiently for the people with the skills that
> you don't have to fix the problems that they confirm. Tens of millions
> of users are using the product daily for professional quality work -
> you're in the minority.


I wrote a message to Joel Madero in private because I didn't see it fit
to write anything more philosophical about the nature of open source
development on this list.

I did mention to him that people like him could be held liable in the
end for acts they have committed, or didn't commit, such as false
advertizing, which this product is doing, like so many others, even if
there is not a form of direct contractual agreement in monetary terms,
or anything like it, at the present date, the way this system is
constructed.

"No warranty" doesn't hold much water in a court of law if it actually
violates common principles.

And I hope you do realize, that all of you, developers or not, could be
held liable for the work you do, and false advertizing you are a part
of, if the false promises you make on websites such as that of this
product, come down to costing people a lot of time and money, because
you make promises you do not actually live up to.

And I stated these things because a form of reward is often implied in
using as well as creating open source products, and "no monetary gain"
is not a reality. People do this work and often get rewarded in other
forms, often as a form of investment or finding employment later down
the line. And I stated that everyone who is using open source material
is investing in the future, and the contract is often that something may
be free for now, but will yield rewards later down the line, or will
even require payment later down the line, because anyone who has made a
lot of money based on something free, will feel like paying back on
that.

So I feel this "no responsibility" claim is just nonsense to begin with.
That is not how life works, and it is not how people work.

If you put something out into the world, then accept responsibility for
it. And this is just common sense, but open source people often try to
reinvent common sense, and think they can do better than anyone, because
in some way they are distancing themselves from corporate people, so
they must be superior.

"No liability" or "no warranty" is going to not work out in the end, and
you are going to get hurt for it. And this is a promise as well, because
you are hurting yourself, and no one else.

Moreover, stating that in some way people (such as me) must be a good
'sheep' and are required to speak politely (as if speaking to superiors)
and then "patiently wait" (as if open source is not about active
involvement) until others who "do have the skills" see fit to spend
their valuable time on issues that they confirm at their sole
discretion, basically without anyone else having a say, but moreover,
without any requirement to even /listen/ to anyone else outside of their
scope, including, basically, all users, I can only currently qualify as
extremely arrogant, and downright oppressive. And I feel this user only
made these statements because it was done in private, whereas I didn't
write my message with privacy in mind.

If that is the picture you want to paint of yourself, fine, but then I
am not a part of that, or I am not a part of you.

Moreover, this arrogance mostly results also, of his incorrect
assumption that I am not a developer myself, and his condescending tone
only results at this point from thinking I have no code development
skills in the first place. "Wait until people who do have some skills to
see fit to maybe maybe maybe design the feature you want".

"You small man" you might add, and that would then apply to me.
Belittling users who have no coding skills in this fashion.... and
completely wrong in the first place, as it may be. Oh, you might say,
then why don't you say so! You might work for us! Suddenly the tone
changes and instead of filing bug reports (however mundane) I would now
be required to do that work myself, right?

Free work!!

Oops. Yes, as a user I might be thankful on my knees that these great
developers have even seen fit to create the product in the first place,
and that I, as an insignificant being, am even allowed to use it, in the
first place.

Treated as some kind of worm, or some lowly being.

"Your subjective feelings are irrelevant". Really. What if those
subjective feelings might in the end come down to work opportunity and
employment opportunity being lost for you, yourself? You are taking a
big gamble here man.

Maybe the small fly ends up being something bigger than that.

Funny, some people in positions of authority or power often pose as
small people to elicit responses like that. I don't know of many that
do. A Bishop in the united states, once attended his own Christmas
sermon dressed up as a beggar. After most of those good faith Christians
had tried to shoo him out of his own Christmas church, he doffed his
attire and proceeded to say that he didn't mean to shame them, but all
the same it should provide a lesson as to how people are often judged by
appearances, and that perhaps it should not be a right thing to do.
Unrelated here, but some C.E.O.'s do the same, I'm sure.

This person says "feel free to report a bug" after saying that no one is
going to listen to it anyway.

Since these are just "subjective feelings" anyway, and "millions of
users" that you never asked never complained about it to your knowledge.

The question of whether something /should/ work in a certain way, is
apparently not important.

And yes, people get fired for such things. However much you may disagree
with that, for instance, an employee for the Linux Foundation was pretty
much fired after publicly attacking the proposals of a member (or
sponsor) organisation. So I would say to watch your words, and do not
assume you can know whom you are talking to, or whether something will
not bite you in the end.

A more sane and polite approach, yourself, might be advisable. Try to
act in a way in which you will never need to apologize, even if you turn
out to have been wrong. Try to assume best intents, and try to assume
knowledge on the part of the other. Also try to assume competence, in
the beginning. Try to assume that what someone is saying, might actually
have some merit. You might come much farther in life, if you do so.

And don't risk getting burned for some arrogance popping out in case no
one else can hear it, you think, or it is being said to someone who
doesn't matter anyway.

And my name, it doesn't matter, but you can find out easily.

And I am someone of complete insignificance, after all.

Or, as dr. Evil liked to say, "The details of my life are
inconsequential".

;-).

Regards, B.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

jmadero jmadero
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

:) Funny enough I almost did the same but out of respect for your choice
to keep things private, I chose not to. You've not given the same
consideration so:

Heads up to this user - he has zero respect for the community, enjoys
wasting everyone time, and wants to use the list as a means to waste
everyone's time with a long novel (which I rightfully ignored). He
clearly just is using a user support thread for a free and open source
project powered by incredible volunteers as a means to complain and whine.

I stand by what I said - the product works for tens of millions of
users, I use it daily for professional work, and I have zero will to
read a multi-page rant from a verbose user that likes going WAY off
topic. He seems to have a lot more time to waste than I do.


Warmest Regards,

Joel

On 6/1/2016 1:01 PM, B.S. wrote:

> Well then if you are going to respond like that, I am going to respond
> in public.
>
>
> Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 18:13:
>> I use LibreOffice daily for professional work - your subjective feelings
>> are irrelevant in this outside of imposing a common sense "duty" (as a
>> member of the open source world) to report whatever issues you have in a
>> polite way and then wait patiently for the people with the skills that
>> you don't have to fix the problems that they confirm. Tens of millions
>> of users are using the product daily for professional quality work -
>> you're in the minority.
>
>
> I wrote a message to Joel Madero in private because I didn't see it
> fit to write anything more philosophical about the nature of open
> source development on this list.
>
> I did mention to him that people like him could be held liable in the
> end for acts they have committed, or didn't commit, such as false
> advertizing, which this product is doing, like so many others, even if
> there is not a form of direct contractual agreement in monetary terms,
> or anything like it, at the present date, the way this system is
> constructed.
>
> "No warranty" doesn't hold much water in a court of law if it actually
> violates common principles.
>
> And I hope you do realize, that all of you, developers or not, could
> be held liable for the work you do, and false advertizing you are a
> part of, if the false promises you make on websites such as that of
> this product, come down to costing people a lot of time and money,
> because you make promises you do not actually live up to.
>
> And I stated these things because a form of reward is often implied in
> using as well as creating open source products, and "no monetary gain"
> is not a reality. People do this work and often get rewarded in other
> forms, often as a form of investment or finding employment later down
> the line. And I stated that everyone who is using open source material
> is investing in the future, and the contract is often that something
> may be free for now, but will yield rewards later down the line, or
> will even require payment later down the line, because anyone who has
> made a lot of money based on something free, will feel like paying
> back on that.
>
> So I feel this "no responsibility" claim is just nonsense to begin
> with. That is not how life works, and it is not how people work.
>
> If you put something out into the world, then accept responsibility
> for it. And this is just common sense, but open source people often
> try to reinvent common sense, and think they can do better than
> anyone, because in some way they are distancing themselves from
> corporate people, so they must be superior.
>
> "No liability" or "no warranty" is going to not work out in the end,
> and you are going to get hurt for it. And this is a promise as well,
> because you are hurting yourself, and no one else.
>
> Moreover, stating that in some way people (such as me) must be a good
> 'sheep' and are required to speak politely (as if speaking to
> superiors) and then "patiently wait" (as if open source is not about
> active involvement) until others who "do have the skills" see fit to
> spend their valuable time on issues that they confirm at their sole
> discretion, basically without anyone else having a say, but moreover,
> without any requirement to even /listen/ to anyone else outside of
> their scope, including, basically, all users, I can only currently
> qualify as extremely arrogant, and downright oppressive. And I feel
> this user only made these statements because it was done in private,
> whereas I didn't write my message with privacy in mind.
>
> If that is the picture you want to paint of yourself, fine, but then I
> am not a part of that, or I am not a part of you.
>
> Moreover, this arrogance mostly results also, of his incorrect
> assumption that I am not a developer myself, and his condescending
> tone only results at this point from thinking I have no code
> development skills in the first place. "Wait until people who do have
> some skills to see fit to maybe maybe maybe design the feature you want".
>
> "You small man" you might add, and that would then apply to me.
> Belittling users who have no coding skills in this fashion.... and
> completely wrong in the first place, as it may be. Oh, you might say,
> then why don't you say so! You might work for us! Suddenly the tone
> changes and instead of filing bug reports (however mundane) I would
> now be required to do that work myself, right?
>
> Free work!!
>
> Oops. Yes, as a user I might be thankful on my knees that these great
> developers have even seen fit to create the product in the first
> place, and that I, as an insignificant being, am even allowed to use
> it, in the first place.
>
> Treated as some kind of worm, or some lowly being.
>
> "Your subjective feelings are irrelevant". Really. What if those
> subjective feelings might in the end come down to work opportunity and
> employment opportunity being lost for you, yourself? You are taking a
> big gamble here man.
>
> Maybe the small fly ends up being something bigger than that.
>
> Funny, some people in positions of authority or power often pose as
> small people to elicit responses like that. I don't know of many that
> do. A Bishop in the united states, once attended his own Christmas
> sermon dressed up as a beggar. After most of those good faith
> Christians had tried to shoo him out of his own Christmas church, he
> doffed his attire and proceeded to say that he didn't mean to shame
> them, but all the same it should provide a lesson as to how people are
> often judged by appearances, and that perhaps it should not be a right
> thing to do. Unrelated here, but some C.E.O.'s do the same, I'm sure.
>
> This person says "feel free to report a bug" after saying that no one
> is going to listen to it anyway.
>
> Since these are just "subjective feelings" anyway, and "millions of
> users" that you never asked never complained about it to your knowledge.
>
> The question of whether something /should/ work in a certain way, is
> apparently not important.
>
> And yes, people get fired for such things. However much you may
> disagree with that, for instance, an employee for the Linux Foundation
> was pretty much fired after publicly attacking the proposals of a
> member (or sponsor) organisation. So I would say to watch your words,
> and do not assume you can know whom you are talking to, or whether
> something will not bite you in the end.
>
> A more sane and polite approach, yourself, might be advisable. Try to
> act in a way in which you will never need to apologize, even if you
> turn out to have been wrong. Try to assume best intents, and try to
> assume knowledge on the part of the other. Also try to assume
> competence, in the beginning. Try to assume that what someone is
> saying, might actually have some merit. You might come much farther in
> life, if you do so.
>
> And don't risk getting burned for some arrogance popping out in case
> no one else can hear it, you think, or it is being said to someone who
> doesn't matter anyway.
>
> And my name, it doesn't matter, but you can find out easily.
>
> And I am someone of complete insignificance, after all.
>
> Or, as dr. Evil liked to say, "The details of my life are
> inconsequential".
>
> ;-).
>
> Regards, B.
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by Bo Siltberg
Bo Siltberg schreef op 01-06-2016 21:44:

> Then try 5.0 if you need extensive undo, or simply try to find another
> way
> of writing that does not rely in too much undo. It is clearly not meant
> for
> reverting some hour of work.

Why don't you try to stop people from doing what they want in their
private time? Oh, you are already doing so.

And maybe you should also try to determine what a feature, that has
existed for many years now in many software solutions, in a much greater
design and extent, I might add, why don't you try to determine what that
feature is meant to be used for, at your sole behest, irrespective of
what real people actually want?

Oh, I know you do. What if, if that feature actually had any sane
implementation like most applications do have, and which should form at
least an example of how it should work, what if that feature did allow
or would allow someone to revert hours of work? Would that be a problem
to you?

Would it be a problem to you if people actually used it for that? Or is
it only a problem that either (a) it means the current system is not
really all that great or (b) someone would need to be in agreement with
that idea?

I mean in both cases, if there actually was some support for the
feature, people might implement it, and you might be wrong about your
assumptions. Which I guess, is something you don't want to be all that
often. But regardless, it would probably make everyone a lot happier,
even though you can perhaps not readily imagine that.

Those 100 undo steps we have today are single character undos. If
someone makes more changes, they might amount to 50 characters of
backdraft. 50 characters of history. It might not be more than a single
line (or sentence).

How can you seriously consider that to be any good?

"Should be fine for most people" as the other person says, is just not
reality.

Only if your operations are actually block-level operations, does it
make any real sense.

Or if you only want to undo stuff within the space of a minute.

See the undo system already saves entire blocks. It just needs to be
augmented for that to also happen, in condensation, for character-level
operations, you see.

And most applications have that.

Most actually do.

You are really in the minority here, what that goes, and LibreOffice
users themselves are also, in the minority, themselves. Whether you want
that or not, and whether you like that or not, as well.

So using the claim of "large user base" or "great experience" as an
argument here is really void. "Millions of people are using it and not
finding fault". Really, did you ask them.

Did you hold a poll over millions of users over this issue?

Those insignificant beings, did you inquire into their opinions?

Some projects do. NetworkManager recently did, and it was great that
they did. They took it very seriously.

I think many projects do not.

Anyway I am writing this with a foot that is about twice its regular
size, and I think I need to quit it now.

Regards.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by jmadero
Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 22:10:
> :) Funny enough I almost did the same but out of respect for your
> choice to keep things private, I chose not to. You've not given the
> same consideration so:

That's funny indeed.

> Heads up to this user - he has zero respect for the community, enjoys
> wasting everyone time, and wants to use the list as a means to waste
> everyone's time with a long novel (which I rightfully ignored). He
> clearly just is using a user support thread for a free and open source
> project powered by incredible volunteers as a means to complain and
> whine.

Let's explain a little what those statements mean, because it is easy.

First, you are assuming dreadfully wrong intent with everything I have
written. That is usually a way to disqualify contributions when you have
no real arguments to do so.

Secondly, I did not send that long novel to everyone, so you are wrong
again, and attributing something to me, that I clearly consciously
avoided doing in the first place. Great for that.

Secondly again, you are doing that thing: embellish your own position in
a way to discredit my own. Not only do you have to state, you feel, to
treat my attempts here as lacking any merit, but also that my intent is
for them to not have any merit.

So that thing I just asked you to do: to assume good intent, well, let's
just say that you are a bit of a hard learner in that sense. Not a
problem. But still what happens.

You must discredit my entire person to keep support here from other
people on this list.

And at the same time, you must slime with those other people, and state
how great you think they are, because I just said that you have rather
low regard for them.

We call this "damage control mode". I don't think you are all that good
at it, but all the same, it is just what is.

Hence all those smiles, and those "warmest regards". They are just a
slight bit insincere, but that doesn't matter, it's the idea or the
thought that counts, right?


> I stand by what I said - the product works for tens of millions of
> users, I use it daily for professional work, and I have zero will to
> read a multi-page rant from a verbose user that likes going WAY off
> topic. He seems to have a lot more time to waste than I do.

Completely ignoring the topic at hand yourself.

By your logic, because something "works" for millions of people,
apparently it works "all the time". Or, similarly or conversely, it
never fails to work for them. After all, it is just some blanket
statement. A car may work for millions of people too, even if it breaks
down every 20 miles. Depends on your definition of "working" doesn't it?
Further more, it says nothing about things that might be improved, or
things that might be individually lacking. It is just a way of avoiding
that subject.

And actually I have no time to waste.... but a good reason why I am
doing so regardless ;-). Let's call it being destroyed by some people
and having a lacking ability to express myself tersely as a result.

In any case, you have zero will to begin with, and that was my point.

Regards.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by Piet van Oostrum-2
Piet van Oostrum schreef op 01-06-2016 21:53:

> There is an option under Advanced > Expert Configuration >
> org.openoffice.Office.Common > Undo
> The default is 100 steps which should be enough for normal use. But
> you can increase it if you want.

Oh, by the way, I changed that value to 20000 (thank you for your
admission and request here) but after changing or attempting about 200
undo's, now all my text has changed to bold in any new document while
not being bolded, or rather, being regular text but still having bold
display ;-).

It only happened for the font I was writing in, but apparently I have to
reset my config.

Thank you anyway,

but 100 character steps is not enough for normal use for a lot of people
and a lot of use cases.

That's really just 100 characters.

My browser box in this webmail has better undo.

Regards.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

B.S. B.S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

B.S. schreef op 01-06-2016 22:41:

> Regards.

By the way, no one has still not really tackled the question of whether
there should be better undo. People are trying to avoid that subject.

People are not giving any reasons for why it shouldn't be there.

People are questioning and criticising the motives for wanting it.

Or questioning whether I really need it (which is that thing Linux
people often do).

Or, as the last resort, being in disagreement with the path I have
chosen to voice my concerns, which is a public list where everyone can
hear it, instead of a bug report that is by its nature, still rather
private.

Basically, that's just a way to shut someone up and ensure that the
exposure for these words (or those words) would be rather very limited.

Ill intent? Yes it is ill intent and people do it constantly.

A user support list is also a public "face" you might say.

Anyway enough of this. People just don't want the dirty laundry to come
out, and so they redirect most or all attempts that indicate that the
product might not be perfect.

The website only shines of perfection. Then don't want people to hear a
different story, do you?

It's just bureaucracy and I cannot really blame you for it, but it is
still what happens.

Negative feedback is not welcomed unless there is immediately a path for
achieving the correct result, which would only happen if that person
making the request, immediately set out achieving it. In that case it
would come across as immediately constructive and speaking well of the
product "see, another person wants to get involved!". But in the
meantime, when some negativity needs to be uttered without an immediate
resolution that will instantly tell a good story about the product
again.

Those words are just not welcomed usually and have to be disqualified
and discredited with such words as "rant" and "troll" (to your credit
you haven't used it) and "is just here to waste everyone's time" (and
for no other reason, obviously).

Oh yeah, of course "whine" and "complain" also qualify. To disqualify.

Assuming ill intent? Not really, it's just what happens. It is just the
results that you see repeated over and over.

They are not assumptions in advance. They are just repeated observations
over a much longer period. And something that gets proven again and
again. You may disagree of course.

But the reality is that negative feedback is not welcomed in public, and
you may make of that what you want.

Regards and signing out.

Hopefully, really.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

jmadero jmadero
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality



On 6/1/2016 1:55 PM, B.S. wrote:
> B.S. schreef op 01-06-2016 22:41:
>
>> Regards.
>
> By the way, no one has still not really tackled the question of
> whether there should be better undo. People are trying to avoid that
> subject.
That is simply untrue. How about you read what I said. Report the issue
as an enhancement request where feedback from the UX team (the ones
actually doing the work) will be direct. This is not the place for this
hypothetical in the air "what if"..... this is the place for user
support (which you got, you slammed, you gave pages of unnecessary waste
of time words, etc....).

Bug reports aren't private, they are entirely public - so, to use your
name, that is entire BS.

Or in the alternative, go buy another product and then see how far your
whining gets with them.


Best,
Joel



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

V Stuart Foote V Stuart Foote
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by B.S.
Well for starters the projects takes requests for enhancement  via the project Bugzilla portal.

Otherwise, here is my take on LibreOffice Undo/Redo support.

First I  would point out that the undo, as moved into Expert configuration at 5.1, does not default to 100 "characters" but to 100 change actions.

In a rather sophisticated algorithm text being entered is handled at word boundaries, unless a a misspelling or grammar rule was broken--those are "undone" character at a time. White space is collapsed and undone as a single action.  Application of style is "undone" in the discrete steps it was applied--a word at a time or a paragraph or an entire text selection.

So, in point of fact--a default 100 "Undo" action value is actually a reasonable default.   Personally I don't believe there is much benefit to increasing defaults beyond that as the assertion of "Undo" and "Redo" is linear

Secondly, should a user feel it is really needed, it is trivial to increase the value from Expert configuration:

Tools ->Options -> Advanced: Open Expert Configuration and search for "Undo"
the stanza needed is in "org.openoffice.Office.Common",  edit to open dialog and reset the value.  A bit higher perhaps 500, but would more than that provide any useful context for reverting editing?

But there is added overhead in increasing the buffer, so I would suggest it is best to keep it small.

Third, the Undo/Redo is provided with split button menu listing all change actions as a stack, while Ctrl+Z/Ctrl+Y are applied sequentially--the split menu allows selection of multiple steps to Undo/Redo to apply as a block.

Given that, folks should appreciate there is  quite a bit of functionality provided with LibreOffice's Undo/Redo mechanism. Also, it functions pretty consistently across the document modules

Is it perfect? No, of course not, but I have to challenge OP as to what additional facet of "Undo/Redo" is missing, or requires improvement?

Personally I can envision a mechanism of incremental document saves and linked to the auto-save settings.  
Where now--we can *only* choose to abandon all changes by quitting the document. With an incremental save capability, if I wanted to back up 10-minutes I'd restore the edit session to that document state.  And I would assume it could be extended to be able to split out a new document based on the incremental save--while continuing with current edits.

Stuart









James E. Lang James E. Lang
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by B.S.
Hi B. S.

I am simply a user of LibreOffice, not a developer.

The tone of the original post on this thread was rather brusk. How do you envision undo to function as opposed to how it currently functions (mechanisms please -- not just results)? How should a block of changes to be undone be defined? This level of discourse was lacking in what was taken to be a rant. Vinegar was there but honey was not.

BTW, you did send a long diatribe to the list which means it went to "everybody." No, the Pope and Prime Minister of The Netherlands probably did not see it so literally speaking you didn't send it to everybody.

The first response addressed your tone and stated the reality (like it or not) about things getting changed by *developers* who may not find the requested change (which in this instance was not identified) to be of immediate interest to them. Developers of Open Source projects like LibreOffice are oftentimes users of the software themselves. In general there is no hierarchy of managers to assign tasks to a programmer on the project whether the programmer is interested in the task or not.

The original responder also suggested that you delve into the code and submit a patch that would implement the feature that you feel is lacking. You did state in a later post that you are a software developer so aside from the size and complexity of the project that ought not to be such a daunting task. Other posts by you seem to imply that you are only interested in performing development work if you are paid money for doing so. I truly hope I misunderstood that. The spirit of FOSS development is entirely different.

Nobody is suggesting that you kiss the ring on the developers' hands. Simply state _how_ undo in Writer can be made better. Hopefully that will lead to a rational discussion and result in an even better product for everybody. Ranting and threatening will accomplish little if any good.

--
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: "B.S." <[hidden email]>
To: Users <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:35
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] undo functionality

Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 22:10:
> :) Funny enough I almost did the same but out of respect for your
> choice to keep things private, I chose not to. You've not given the
> same consideration so:

That's funny indeed.

> Heads up to this user - he has zero respect for the community, enjoys
> wasting everyone time, and wants to use the list as a means to waste
> everyone's time with a long novel (which I rightfully ignored). He
> clearly just is using a user support thread for a free and open source
> project powered by incredible volunteers as a means to complain and
> whine.

Let's explain a little what those statements mean, because it is easy.

First, you are assuming dreadfully wrong intent with everything I have
written. That is usually a way to disqualify contributions when you have
no real arguments to do so.

Secondly, I did not send that long novel to everyone, so you are wrong
again, and attributing something to me, that I clearly consciously
avoided doing in the first place. Great for that.

Secondly again, you are doing that thing: embellish your own position in
a way to discredit my own. Not only do you have to state, you feel, to
treat my attempts here as lacking any merit, but also that my intent is
for them to not have any merit.

So that thing I just asked you to do: to assume good intent, well, let's
just say that you are a bit of a hard learner in that sense. Not a
problem. But still what happens.

You must discredit my entire person to keep support here from other
people on this list.

And at the same time, you must slime with those other people, and state
how great you think they are, because I just said that you have rather
low regard for them.

We call this "damage control mode". I don't think you are all that good
at it, but all the same, it is just what is.

Hence all those smiles, and those "warmest regards". They are just a
slight bit insincere, but that doesn't matter, it's the idea or the
thought that counts, right?


> I stand by what I said - the product works for tens of millions of
> users, I use it daily for professional work, and I have zero will to
> read a multi-page rant from a verbose user that likes going WAY off
> topic. He seems to have a lot more time to waste than I do.

Completely ignoring the topic at hand yourself.

By your logic, because something "works" for millions of people,
apparently it works "all the time". Or, similarly or conversely, it
never fails to work for them. After all, it is just some blanket
statement. A car may work for millions of people too, even if it breaks
down every 20 miles. Depends on your definition of "working" doesn't it?
Further more, it says nothing about things that might be improved, or
things that might be individually lacking. It is just a way of avoiding
that subject.

And actually I have no time to waste.... but a good reason why I am
doing so regardless ;-). Let's call it being destroyed by some people
and having a lacking ability to express myself tersely as a result.

In any case, you have zero will to begin with, and that was my point.

Regards.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
steveedmonds steveedmonds
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by V Stuart Foote
I think the built in help may need updating for this change in location
for undo settings for 5.1.3.2.
Steve

On 2016-06-02 10:20, V Stuart Foote wrote:
> Secondly, should a user feel it is really needed, it is trivial to increase
> the value from Expert configuration:
>
> Tools ->Options -> Advanced: Open Expert Configuration and search for "Undo"
> the stanza needed is in "org.openoffice.Office.Common",  edit to open dialog
> and reset the value.  A bit higher perhaps 500, but would more than that
> provide any useful context for reverting editing?


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

V Stuart Foote V Stuart Foote
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

steveedmonds wrote
I think the built in help may need updating for this change in location
for undo settings for 5.1.3.2.
Actually already in code review queue for tdf#99637  (or the NAB tdf#97279)  response to changes of ref [1] with:

https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/24774/  to supplement ref [2].

=-ref-=
[1] Options panel rework
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=0b0fb87fbac36ef9fbf3dfeac0f1372617f4b3e4

[2] Removal of obsolete Help entries
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/help/commit/?id=7baa265c995f1d27cef325bf1583a579737e11df
Cley Faye Cley Faye
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: undo functionality

In reply to this post by V Stuart Foote
2016-06-02 0:20 GMT+02:00 V Stuart Foote <[hidden email]>:

> Personally I can envision a mechanism of incremental document saves and
> linked to the auto-save settings.
> Where now--we can *only* choose to abandon all changes by quitting the
> document. With an incremental save capability, if I wanted to back up
> 10-minutes I'd restore the edit session to that document state.  And I
> would
> assume it could be extended to be able to split out a new document based on
> the incremental save--while continuing with current edits.
>

‚ÄčA bit of personal opinion here: this can be done completely outside of
LibreOffice, in a program-agnostic way that might be more useful since it
could be applied to other stuff.
A script/program set to monitor a directory/file, and create a new backup
with timestamp every time the file change would suit that purpose. Simply
activate the auto-save feature of your favorite tool and it can take
advantage of it.
Of course, it could also be done *in* LibreOffice/any tool, and provide
better integration (no need to close/reopen file for example). But I'm
cautious when too many unrelated features find their way in a program...

I might write some lightweight python script to do just that, for fun :)
and to make everyone happy, I'll add a settings where you can limit the
amount of backup to keep ;)

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Next » 12