https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149492
--- Comment #9 from Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #8) > Really? Why? This case does not fit that policy; so the "why" does not apply here. The answer to "why" is mostly this: *generally* there's no way to find out the actual problem, that was fixed by resetting the profile; and also *usually* there's no way to repro. Hence a need to close without a code fix. The WORKSFORME is misused here, as there's no better alternative OTOH, whenever such a "profile corruption" has a reproducing scenario; or there is a copy of such a profile that allows to repro the resulting problem, and there's a reason to fix *that* resulting problem (as opposed to keeping the failure on such a corruption, and instead fixing the cause of corruption), this is *not* something we should close. I recall several cases when we fixed problems that could be temporarily fixed by profile reset. As said: I don't think this should be closed. The problem is clear, and even though I don't see an easy way to do this, there should be something to improve UX in such a case. I also recall my comments elsewhere, when customized menus resulted in absence of new features, or broken existing features after upgrades, because menu changes (and UNO commands) weren't updated for the user. This is basically the same problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
