Closed
Bug 408786
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 16 years ago
recurring event to task conversion is not possible
Categories
(Calendar :: Lightning Only, defect)
Calendar
Lightning Only
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
FIXED
0.8
People
(Reporter: andreas.treumann, Assigned: dbo)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
7.08 KB,
patch
|
Fallen
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
STEPS TO REPRODUCE: =================== - create a recurring event (on a WCAP calender, see bug 408671) - drag one event of this rule to the task mode icon RESULT: ======= - nothing EXPECTED RESULT: ================ - the event should be converted to a task REPRODUCIBLE: ============= - always recurring task to event conversion is also not possible.
Flags: blocking-calendar0.8?
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
Conversion recurring event/task to eMail fails too.
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-calendar0.8? → blocking-calendar0.8+
Updated•16 years ago
|
Version: Trunk → unspecified
Updated•16 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → michael.buettner
Comment 2•16 years ago
|
||
This may be fixed if bug 392465 is fixed. The problem is that the dropped item contains a RECURRENCE-ID. Therefore, the ICS parser fails on the item and doesn't return it via parser.getItems({}).
Comment 3•16 years ago
|
||
Do we want a temporary fix for this? Converting an occurrence to a task should create a new parent task. Possibilities: * fix libical to ignore the recurrence-id * use regex to remove \nRECURRENCE-ID:[^\n]* before parsing the item. * ... ?
Assignee: michael.buettner → philipp
Comment 4•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3) > Do we want a temporary fix for this? Converting an occurrence to a task should > create a new parent task. > > Possibilities: > * fix libical to ignore the recurrence-id This would also fix bug 357399 and bug 392465.
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Do we want a temporary fix for this? Converting an occurrence to a task should > > create a new parent task. > > > > Possibilities: > > * fix libical to ignore the recurrence-id Philipp, what do you want to fix in libical? AFAIK libical doesn't do special handling for the RECURRENCE-ID property that affects us. IMO the core problem of the mentioned bugs: > This would also fix bug 357399 and bug 392465. is that our code cannot cope with occurrences without access to the parent item. There's lot of code that relies on a parentItem being available, thus I don't see a point fix here. Back to this conversion bug, I'd vote for removing the RECURRENCE-ID property or alternatively modify the parser (API) to support retrieving the "uncorrelated" set of occurrences, or however we will call those items. Anyway, the RECURRENCE-ID needs to be filtered out.
Comment 6•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #5) > Anyway, > the RECURRENCE-ID needs to be filtered out. > If removing RECURRENCE-ID is ok for event<->task conversion, why should it not be ok for invitations? I just wanted to vote for doing this fix in a central place that would fix the other (similar) bugs as well.
Comment 7•16 years ago
|
||
It would be best to fire a dialog similar the the edit-dialog (this occurence -> strip parent, all-occrences -> recurring task). Unfortunately we're in string-freeze and I have no idea how difficult this would be.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #6) > If removing RECURRENCE-ID is ok for event<->task conversion, why should it not > be ok for invitations? Because on conversion we are creating new items (carrying a new id), so this loss is not important while on replying/updating invitations we need "reference semantics" and act on the referred item.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•16 years ago
|
||
- extending the parser to provide the parentless items - incorporating those parentless items for conversion IMO in the long term we need to be able to handle parentless occurrences safely, but for short term (0.8) we could go this way since the RECURRENCE-ID is stripped anyway on conversion.
Assignee: philipp → daniel.boelzle
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #301987 -
Flags: review?(philipp)
Comment 10•16 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 301987 [details] [diff] [review] fix looks good, thanks for taking care! r=philipp
Attachment #301987 -
Flags: review?(philipp) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•16 years ago
|
||
Checked in on HEAD and MOZILLA_1_8_BRANCH => FIXED.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 0.8
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•16 years ago
|
||
Checked in latest nightly build 20080207 - > task is fixed and verified.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•