149246 - need to be able to specify relative dates in days

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Bugzilla :: Query/Bug List, enhancement)

Description

[Michael Schindler]

beeing able to specify relative dates allows savings of queries for the last
week or periods back.

syntax: -?\d+[dD]     ("-20d" means 20 days back, "20D" the same)

Comment 1

[Michael Schindler]

Attachment: diff -u of patch

Comment 2

[Jouni Heikniemi]

-> patch author, keywords and stuff. Also proposing for consideration in 2.18.

Comment 3

[Michael Schindler]

Attachment: diff -u of buglist.cgi

this fix also supports relative dates in weeks, month, years and considers
timezones.

Comment 4

[Jouni Heikniemi]

Comment on attachment 88279 [details] [diff] [review]
diff -u of buglist.cgi

Tested only quickly and seemed to work, so I'll just post some review nits
mostly about code readability:

>+        my ($n, $u, $date) = ($1, lc $2, time);

Please make those $n and $u something more verbose. Try $amount and $unit or
something similar. 

>+        my ($sec,$min,$hour,$mday,$mon,$year,$wday) = localtime($date);

Be consistent: use spaces after commas here, too. $month instead of $mon,
please?

>+        $u='d', $n=7*$n+$wday if $u eq 'w';  # convert weeks to days
..
>+        $year -= $n, $mon=0 if $u eq 'y';
>+        $mon -= $n if $u eq 'm';

Please rewrite these as "if $unit eq 'w' { ... }". 

>+        while($mon<0) {$year--; $mon += 12;}

A space to separate the while and the (, and two more to separate the block
contents from the braces around it.


I hope that cuts it; I'll review again when I'm better awake. :-)

Comment 5

[Michael Schindler]

Attachment: fixed review issues

fixed review issues

Comment 6

[Jouni Heikniemi]

Comment on attachment 88287 [details] [diff] [review]
fixed review issues

This is fine with me, though I'm not certain about how the relative month
modifier should work. Currently if I type -2m now (on 20th June), I get bugs
starting from May 2002. 

I can't say whether that's correct or not; the alternative (making the above
testcase mean Apr 2002+) is not intuitively totally correct either. 

I think the most used option will be 'd' anyway, so we can fix those problems
later.


r=jouni; if somebody else has the time to come and take a look at this, that's
great. If not, I'll give this the second r= eventually when some more testing
has been done. I'll patch this into our own installation now.

Comment 7

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

Is this the fix for bug 37749 ?

Comment 8

[Michael Schindler]

that patch allows relative dates in any date field in the query-page, so you 
could put "123d" in the date range field, and leave the other date range 
field "now".
if desired I could patch the relative day code to do that to fix the 37749 and 
43551 too.

Comment 9

[Bradley Baetz (:bbaetz)]

No, bug 37749 is a sideeffect of how we handle the from/to stuff having the to
variable be blank.

Comment 10

[Jouni Heikniemi]

>if desired I could patch the relative day code to do that to fix the 37749 and 
>43551 too.

Why not do that, but please don't embed the required fixes into this patch. This
is already very close to checkin, and we wouldn't want to delay it. Make another
patch on the top of this if necessary and attach it to the relevant bug.

Comment 11

[Jouni Heikniemi]

Comment on attachment 88287 [details] [diff] [review]
fixed review issues

Okay, 2xr=jouni then. I'll check this in soon.

Comment 12

[Jouni Heikniemi]

*** Bug 156411 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13

[Jouni Heikniemi]

Checked into the trunk. Thanks for the patch, Michael!

Checking in buglist.cgi;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/buglist.cgi,v  <--  buglist.cgi
new revision: 1.181; previous revision: 1.180
done

Comment 14

[Bradley Baetz (:bbaetz)]

*** Bug 175237 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15

[Jason Bassford]

*** Bug 177697 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 16

[Antonis Christofides]

Attachment: UI changes

The functionality won't be very useful if you don't know it's there, so here's
some simple UI modifications.

Comment 17

[Jouni Heikniemi]

[e-mail]:

Please file another bug if you consider UI changes necessary. This one is
already fixed, and any patches posted to closed bugs are bound to be easily
forgotten.

Comment 18

[Antonis Christofides]

Comment on attachment 116467 [details] [diff] [review]
UI changes

OK, sorry, I filed the new bug 196373.