Ask Your Question

Revision history [back]

click to hide/show revision 1
initial version

There were a feature request FDO#81309 and a rejection in the form of an adverse feature request FDO#81633 which lead to a controversy among developers (fought in FDO#85614 , e.g.). I've read a great deal of that and come to the conclusion: It is a complicated matter - and the most we we can state for sure might be "... that one man's feature is another man's bug", as Koshei Yoshida put it in the discussion.

The present state of the discusssion: V 4.4 will offer as an option if sorting shall adjust references or not.

The broken sheets suffer from having changed the default with V 4.2.(maybe? .7). I personally think it was a bad decission to change the default in this case. It could have been foreseen that a lot of documents would suffer from the change and possibly become unuseable. See this comment.

Those who need former behaviour: Downgrade to an older version (even 3.6.7) from the download archive.

There were a feature request FDO#81309 and a rejection in the form of an adverse feature request FDO#81633 which lead led to a controversy among developers (fought out in FDO#85614 , e.g.). I've read a great deal of that and come to the conclusion: It is a complicated matter - and the most we we can state for sure might be "... that one man's feature is another man's bug", as Koshei Yoshida put it in the discussion.

The present state of the discusssion: V 4.4 will offer as an option if sorting shall adjust references or not.

The broken sheets suffer from having changed the default with V 4.2.(maybe? .7). I personally think it was a bad decission to change the default in this case. It could have been foreseen that a lot of documents would suffer from the change and possibly become unuseable. See this comment.

Those who need former behaviour: Downgrade to an older version (even 3.6.7) from the download archive.

There were a feature request FDO#81309 and a rejection in the form of an adverse feature request FDO#81633 which led to a controversy among developers (fought out in FDO#85614 , e.g.). I've read a great deal of that and come to the conclusion: It is a complicated matter - and the most we we can state for sure might be "... that one man's feature is another man's bug", as Koshei Kohei Yoshida put it in the discussion.

The present state of the discusssion: V 4.4 will offer as an option if sorting shall adjust references or not.

The broken sheets suffer from having changed the default with V 4.2.(maybe? .7). I personally think it was a bad decission to change the default in this case. It could have been foreseen that a lot of documents would suffer from the change and possibly become unuseable. See this comment.

Those who need former behaviour: Downgrade to an older version (even 3.6.7) from the download archive.

There were a feature request FDO#81309 and a rejection in the form of an adverse feature request FDO#81633 which led to a controversy among developers (fought out in FDO#85614 , e.g.). I've read a great deal of that and come to the conclusion: It is a complicated matter - and the most we we can state for sure might be "... that one man's feature is another man's bug", as Kohei Yoshida put it in the discussion.

The present state of the discusssion: V 4.4 will offer as an option if sorting shall adjust references or not.

The broken sheets suffer from having changed the default with V 4.2.(maybe? .7). I personally think it was a bad decission to change the default in this case. It could have been foreseen that a lot of documents would suffer from the change and possibly become unuseable. See this comment.

Those who need former behaviour: Downgrade to an older version (even 3.6.7) from the download archive.

Editing:
The suggestion above is outdated, of course. Recent versions do it as @Triggerhousinggroup describes it in his comment.