https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157943
Stéphane Guillou (stragu) <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEEDINFO Version|7.6.2.1 release |7.4.3.2 release CC| |stephane.guillou@libreoffic | |e.org Blocks| |114300 Ever confirmed|0 |1 See Also| |https://bugs.documentfounda | |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13 | |1401, | |https://bugs.documentfounda | |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12 | |0829 --- Comment #3 from Stéphane Guillou (stragu) <[email protected]> --- 2b4cd99d3360ccffb9829a02412824864d045753 made it into 7.2.0.0alpha0+, but I'm setting the earliest version to tsulayaiv's for now. root and tsulayaiv, do you remember how it used to behave before? Would the dialog only offer the two options „Open R/O” and ”Open Copy”? Armin, what do you think? Reading your commit, this is by design, right? I'm all for more consistency between OS, but I can see the issue in making it this easy to do. Is there a corresponding expert configuration that could block from editing when a lock file exists? That would be useful for system admins wanting to have tighter rules. I see we have bug 120829 already. As stated there, we might just need a clearer, strong warning in the dialog about the consequences of opening with an existing lockfile. See the comments in bug 120829, especially the UX/Design team comments. Would you agree with such a solution, root and tsulayaiv? Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114300 [Bug 114300] [META] Bugs and enhancements involving lock files or file locking -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
