On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 15:43, Tuomas Kuosmanen wrote: > On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 16:35, Rodrigo Moya wrote: > > On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 20:10 +0200, Tuomas Kuosmanen wrote: > > > On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 19:45, Hans Petter Jansson wrote: > > > > > The main issue I see with this is that you will create meetings that > > > > > will disappear the moment you finish creating them (unless "primary" > > > > > implies both displayed and default, which is a little inconsistent). > > > > > > > > What I meant was primary == always shown. Without changing the state of > > > > the checkmarks. > > > > > > We agreed with jpr to implement the following: > > > > > > * It is possible to hide/show a calendar without selecting it > > > * Selecting a calendar makes it visible again > > > * Adding events to a calendar makes it visible again > > > > > hmm, do you mean we should then listen for changes on all the calendars, > > and once there's a change in one of them auto-select it? > > Nah, just when an user adds an event or selects the calendar from the > tree. No need to toggle web-subscribed visible upon change for example. > But the idea is that if you add an event to a hidden calendar(*) then we > need to make the calendar visible so that the event doesnt just > disappear.
This is actually fairly tricky and the only thing I haven't done yet. My feeling is for 2.0 I will just prevent the user from doing this. -JP -- JP Rosevear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ximian, Inc. _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
