Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2015 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi :)
I think you meant that the background behind Tim's answer is not
acceptable.  His actual answer seems very honest, truthful and useful.  It
is not a voice of arbitrary authority but one of wisdom and counsel.  One
problem with emails is that we don't hear the tone of voice nor any clues
from body-language.  Of course a lot of us in IT don't process that sort of
stuff in face-to-face communications either but that's another story.

On this mailing list we have absolutely no control over what the devs do
nor how this project is run and we are almost never asked for our opinions
on what might be a good way.  We can only give answers to try to help users
figure out how to use the suite as it is, and maybe grumble about oddities
and issues related, such as the fading dominance of the MS formats.  We are
free to join other lists such as Discuss@ and the social media channels but
most of us on this mailing-list are only interested in just helping people

Several answers in this thread have been 'brutally' honest with no false
apologies or soft-pedalling the truth or giving it any spin (err, except
with a blatant cough rather than my usual sarcastic quotes ' ).  From my
own experience i suspect many of the answers so far have been answered
off-list by one of the "higher ups" berating them and possibly threatening
to ban them from the lists.

To me Tim's answer seems a bit heroic, not quite on the scale of children
in any war-torn area, but still admirable.  He makes a stand for truth and
honesty and that might have got him in trouble already.

However just because something is not done quite the same way as it's done
in MS Office or/and is not intuitive to some people does not necessarily
make it wrong.

The main problem here, in my opinion, is that it wasn't easy to figure out
and documentation may not have been easy enough to get to.  Of course now
that we have had this answer on the list it will probably crop up again
quite soon and we have a quick answer ready.

Regards from
Tom :)

On 27 March 2015 at 10:38, Pertti Rönnberg <> wrote:

Tim Lloyd's comment is not acceptable!
This is not a question of a (unpaid) programmer's likings or priorities --
this is a serious question of Libre Office's liability,
because both of the the sort buttons in the toolbar (asc & desc) give
wrong results as well as there is no clear explanation why and how the sort
in Data=> sort must be "customized" if yopu want a correct result.

A spreadsheet program that cannot be fully trusted is totally worthless!!

These "bugs" are a result of very bad planning and an obviously total lack
of control & testing of the programming before it was accepted
as a feature in Calc and the complete LibreOffice suite.

Neither is this really not a "game" -- anyone who goes for to programming
something for LibreOffice must feel the responsibility for the result -- as
well as
the controlling team (if any?).

The sort feature is a very important feature why these faults have to be
corrected immediately
   the function of both the sort buttons set to "normal" sort of a
selected range
   all selections set to blanc in Data=>sort=>options
Pertti Rönnberg

On 26.3.2015 2:12, Tim Lloyd wrote:


while LO does allow a certain amount of customisation, at this point in
the game this particular menu option can not be changed.

This then becomes a feature request, either

 * change the default
 * allow the sort options to be customised

Once a feature request is submitted it is really up to a (unpaid)
programmer to step forward and take on the action. I can't see this being
high on the programmer's list of priorities but it may be deemed an "easy
hack" which an aspiring young person could field.


On 26/03/15 10:58, Richard VINCK wrote:

Tim Lloyd
Thank you for pointing this. Indeed, unticking it works then correctly.
But it should be the default, and should remain unticked. (and should be
more visible, as it is hidden in the Option tab)
Can we make it as default?

On 2015-03-26 00:42, Tim Lloyd wrote:

A quick look at the doco reveals...

Range contains column/row labels
– omits the first row or the first column in the selection from the sort

Untick this box and you are sorted.


On 26/03/15 10:06, Wade Smart wrote:

Hmm I just tried to sort going through the
sort menu and I still cant get it to sort

It does numbers just fine though.
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Wade Smart <>

**cough cough** .. feature understood.
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Michael Tiernan
<> wrote:

On 3/25/15 6:53 PM, Wade Smart wrote:

I have on Ubuntu 14.04 and you are correct, sort is not

When I reported it, I provided a great deal of information about it
was told "Not a bug" and "works for me" by those who have the power
close bugs.

My argument was/is that if you use the sort arrows (as you have done
here) then you're asking/telling LO to sort the selected rows with no

Instead it was deemed correct that instead, LO assumes the first cell
found is used as a label regardless of any other settings.

This "feature" (*cough*) cost me a number of hours of work to get
and avoid.

The argument is that since you can use the "Sort" menu option and
this behavior *for each sort occurrence* then there's a work around
the "feature" and we should be happy with that.

   << MCT >> Michael C Tiernan.
   Non Impediti Ratione Cogatationis
   Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs
    should relax and get used to the idea. -Robert A. Heinlein

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot
be deleted

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.