Thx Jeffrey, I've logged this as a bug for Future to keep track of it:
https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8056
On Jan 30, 2007, at 1:15 PM, Jeffrey Harris wrote:
Hi Mimi,
Would it be difficult to treat 'split recurrence series' the same
way we
treat modifications to individual events? e.g. Just because I
change the
Title on instance 3 of a recurring series doesn't mean that the next
time I make a 'this and future' change to say the 'location' field, I
don't want instance 3 to be affected as well. It seems like if we're
going to start keeping track of modifications on a per-attribute
basis,
we should do that for all kinds of modifications, including date/time
modifications that split the recurrence series into multiple parts.
It's quite difficult, unfortunately. Splitting recurrence after a
THISANDFUTURE change is a huge simplification of the recurrence code
which is still very complex despite that simplification.
As it happens, Grant was looking into maybe doing this despite the
additional complexity because it helps sharing conflict resolution a
lot. Note that if we do that it'll have a big impact on Cosmo's
recurrence efforts, too, so since the cost would be high I think it's
likely for preview we'll try to come up with an alternative
simplification for recurrence conflict resolution.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
