[Chandler-dev] Fwd: [Bug 12115] Confusing discrepancy between list views on Hub and Desktop

Mimi Yin <mimi-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.org.osaf.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I am forwarding this bug to the Dev-List as I think it's an important  
usability issue we should address in the web UI for 1.0:

Background:

In the interest of performance, we currently only look 1 month into  
the future when loading recurring events into the Triage Table in the  
Chandler Hub web UI.

This means that the web UI won't display a recurring event under the  
following circumstances:

1. the recurring event *starts* more than 1 month into the future
2. you have deleted the next occurrence, creating a recurrence gap of  
more than 1 month
3. the recurring event recurs at an interval more than 1 month apart  
(e.g. annually recurring holidays)

Given that we will be shipping 1.0- Desktop with a shared U.S.  
Holidays calendar, out of the box, I think we need to make it so that  
at least Scenario #3 works well in the web UI.

 From Randy's comment below, it seems the amount of work required to  
correctly load "the next occurrence of a recurring event series" for  
all 3 scenarios is out of scope for 1.0

However, we can implement a smaller change that would take annually  
recurring events and look 1 year into the future to find the next  
occurrence.

Randy, even though Chandler doesn't support bi-monthly and bi-annual  
recurrence rules. We do support importing them. Would it be possible  
to simply expand this exception to include any recurring events that  
have a recurrence rule of more than 1 month?

Is this an accurate summary Randy?

Are we still missing any key scenarios?

I have logged a separate bug to track implementing a more general fix  
so that all 3 scenarios listed above will work: https:// 
bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12154

Mimi

Begin forwarded message:

> From: bug-comment-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]
> Date: June 10, 2008 11:47:08 AM PDT
> To: mimi-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]
> Subject: [Bug 12115] Confusing discrepancy between list views on  
> Hub and Desktop
>
> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12115
>
>
> Randy Letness <randy-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]> changed:
>
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
>          AssignedTo|randy-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]     | 
> travis-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]
>
>
>
>
> --- Comment #9 from Randy Letness <randy-6zGkXsw2EZWGJGYlWa3Ukdi2O/[email protected]>   
> 2008-06-10 11:47:06 PST ---
> We can definitely look further into the future.  I chose 1 month  
> because its a
> good compromise between system resources (the further you look, the  
> longer the
> query takes) and how far into the future/past people are concerned  
> about.
>
> I guess my thinking was, do I really want to know about something  
> that is going
> to occur one year from now?  If not, then it makes the query  
> execute faster.  I
> can change the period and see what happens and if things don't slow  
> down too
> much we can keep it like that.
>
> Another option is to re-write the query apis to allow no end date  
> to be used
> when searching for instances and provide an api like
> findNextInstance(startDate), which would find the next instance  
> after the given
> date.  That would probably be the best option, but would require a  
> lot more
> work.
>
>
> -- 
> Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/userprefs.cgi? 
> tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are on the CC list for the bug.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.