Closed
Bug 371365
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
Duplicates appear for alarms left in Calendar Alarm window
Categories
(Calendar :: Alarms, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
FIXED
0.7
People
(Reporter: brian, Unassigned)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
61.24 KB,
image/gif
|
Details |
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20061006 Sunbird/0.3 I tend to leave some alarms in the Calendar Alarm window rather than snoozing them, so that I'll get to them when I have time. After an hour or two, a duplicate of each alarm will appear in the Calendar Alarm window. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. create some alarms 2. when they appear in the Calendar Alarm window, leave them there 3. after a while, a duplicate of each alarm appears Actual Results: multiple copies of each alarm are in the Calendar Alarm window and must be dismissed separately. Expected Results: the alarms would simply stay in the Calendar Alarm window until dismissed, but no duplicates would appear.
Summary: Alarms left in Calendar Alarm window duplicate themselves → Duplicates appear for alarms left in Calendar Alarm window
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
WFM using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; pl-PL; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20070213 Sunbird/0.3.1
Hoping that it was because I was still using 0.3, I upgraded to the new version. Same problem. After several hours of the events staying up in a window, I got duplicates of all of them. I even got three copies of one event (which happened to be a repeating event) one of was actually dated tomorrow (the next day the event was scheduled to occur). I have attached a screen shot of the Calendar Alarm window. The first three events appeared normally, and I left them undismissed and unsnoozed (I left them in the Calendar Alarm window). After several hours, you can see that there were repeats of all the events. Note also that this was all done on February 26th, but the last event is for the following day (February 27th). Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20070213 Sunbird/0.3.1 -Bri
Comment 4•17 years ago
|
||
So the problem here is that we re-set the alarm firing queue every 6 hours. Because the items are still in the alarm window, they show up as un-acknowledged to our queries, which means we'll fire them again. I'd suggest that the alarm window should be responsible for filtering these out, which should be pretty easy.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-calendar0.5?
Comment 5•17 years ago
|
||
This won't block 0.5, however we might take it if we get it fixed with enough qa time left.
Flags: blocking-calendar0.5? → blocking-calendar0.5-
Comment 8•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #4) > So the problem here is that we re-set the alarm firing queue every 6 hours. > Because the items are still in the alarm window, they show up as > un-acknowledged to our queries, which means we'll fire them again. I'd suggest > that the alarm window should be responsible for filtering these out, which > should be pretty easy. Yes, although this effectively means the code needs to observe all changes of all involved calendars and filter out the relevant ones for its window. IMO it once again shows up that item value semantics is really a pain in the xyz. Reference semantics as proposed in <http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:Architecture> would have performed better and would make the code more elegant since we could implement a change-listener mechanism per item. However, since we don't have time to rework the base code that way, I think it makes sense to add such functionality to calICalendarManager since the calendar manager already acts as a central service, e.g. addObserverForItem(in calIItemBase item, in calIObserver observer); removeObserverForItem(in calIItemBase item, in calIObserver observer); It gets complicated if the item.calendar, item.id (, item.recurrenceId?) changes, which essentially modifies the item's origin, so the code needs to keep care to send out appropriate onDeleteItem notifications. Regarding occurrences, I think we should limit the use to parent items in the first place, keeping it simple. Opinions?
Flags: blocking-calendar0.7?
Comment 9•17 years ago
|
||
Does this issue in this bug resp. Bug 385629 still exists using a recent 0.7pre nightly build after the checkin for Bug 389245?
Comment 10•17 years ago
|
||
This bug is still present in Sunbird 0.5: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4pre) Gecko/20070614 Sunbird/0.5 It appears to add another alarm every 30 minutes or so.
Comment 11•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #10) Eric, Stefan talks about a recent *nightly* build. There hasn't been a fix for 0.5.
Comment 12•17 years ago
|
||
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.7pre) Gecko/20070827 Calendar/0.7pre Got an alert window and let it stay open for one day, got the alarms for two other events. Actual results: 1. No duplicate alarms anymore. 2. Last alarm is shown again after closing and restarting calendar. Haven't tried reproducing. (And sorry that it isn't the nightly from today.)
Comment 13•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #12) Thanks for retest. Resolving as fixed by the checkin for Bug 389245.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Depends on: 389245
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 0.7
Comment 14•17 years ago
|
||
verified with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.7pre) Gecko/20070908 Calendar/0.7pre
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-calendar0.7?
Reporter | ||
Comment 15•17 years ago
|
||
I can confirm that this bug is fixed in the nightly builds, but now I'm seeing a different problem that may or may not be related to the fix. 1. I have an alarm that is repeated weekly. 2. I receive the alarm normally. 3. I snooze the alarm each day for 7 days until the next alarm triggers. 4. There are now two similar alarms showing (but with different dates) as expected. 5. I dismiss the older of the two alarms. 6. The new alarm also disappears. I would have expected the new alarm to stay if I only dismissed the older one.
Comment 16•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #15) I just filed Bug 397030 for this issue.
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-calendar0.5-
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•