ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
66112
|
Sat Dec 13 02:13:51 2008 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Bug report | Mac OSX | 2.7.5 | Re: Attribute value lost when adding to another extendable attribute |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Here is an excerpt from my config file:
Type Last Edit = datetime
Preset Last Edit =$entry time
Locked Attributes = Last Edit
Subst on edit Last Edit = $date
Preset on Duplicate Last Edit = $date
I have another attribute called Part that I've made extendable.
When I duplicate an entry, Last Edit is updated with the current date correctly. However, as soon as I click the Add Part button next to my extendable Part attribute, and the page reloads to show the entry box for the Part field, the Last Entry field is replaced with a "-".
I have to submit and then re-edit the entry to get Last Edit to have a valid value again.
*EDIT*:
I noticed that any time the page reloads while in the entry screen this happens, e.g. by selecting plain instead of html format.
|
Thanks for reporting that problem. It has been fixed in SVN revision 2156.
|
Excellent! Thank you. |
66323
|
Sat Apr 18 00:33:53 2009 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Question | All | 2.7.5 | Re: Config so that users can delete only their own entries? | Thanks for reminding me of that, it will do fine. A suggestion: Separate Restrict Edit into Restrict Edit and Restrict Delete or some functional equivalent. Then we have the choice to restrict one or the other or both. Is that worth doing?
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: | I've tried
Deny_Delete = All
Allow Delete = $author
and just
Allow Delete = $author
But either users can delete anyone's entries, or they can't delete any entries.
Am I missing something? If not, can you add the capability to allow users to delete, but only their own entries?
Thanks as usual for a great piece of code! |
You cannot put $author into any Allow or Deny option, only explicit login names (not "full" names). What you want however is
Restrict Edit = 1
which lets only the original author either delete or edit entries. If you use that option, you probably want as well
Preset Author = $long_name
Preset on reply Author = $long_name
Preset on duplicate Author = $long_name
Locked Attributes = Author
So a user cannot pretend to be somebody else. You also need a valid "admin user = ..." statement. Note that the admin user always can delete/edit entries. If no admin user is defined, everybody has automatically admin rights, so Restrict Edit has no effect. |
|
66494
|
Wed Aug 5 19:05:01 2009 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Request | All | 2.7.6 | alphabetize Quick Filter items? | Hi Stefan,
I'd like to request a feature: automatic alphabetization of the items in the Quick Filter menus.
We track quite a few detector assemblies, which are produced with non-sequential designations. It would be useful if the Quick Filter list was automatically sorted alphabetically to make it more convenient for folks to find a particular item.
I know people can always search by designation but it would be handy to have this alpha sorting feature. Would it be possible to include that in a future release?
Thanks again for a *very* useful logging system!
Dennis |
66502
|
Fri Aug 7 23:09:42 2009 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Request | All | 2.7.6 | Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items? |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Hi Stefan,
I'd like to request a feature: automatic alphabetization of the items in the Quick Filter menus.
We track quite a few detector assemblies, which are produced with non-sequential designations. It would be useful if the Quick Filter list was automatically sorted alphabetically to make it more convenient for folks to find a particular item.
I know people can always search by designation but it would be handy to have this alpha sorting feature. Would it be possible to include that in a future release?
Thanks again for a *very* useful logging system!
Dennis
|
The order of items in a Quick Filter menu is exactly as in the configuration file. Like if you have items
Options Type = C, D, A, B
they are shown like that in the quick filter menu. If you want to sort them, just do the sorting yourself in the configuration file like
Options Type = A, B, C, D
I have not implemented automatic sorting since some people want a different order, like some main topics at top. So by following the order from the configuration file, everybody can be satisfied just by chaning the order in the config file.
- Stefan
|
Yes, I have been manually sorting and resorting. We have extendable attributes and the list keeps growing so I have to resort every so often. I thought perhaps a simple alphanumeric sort as an option would be popular with most users so I thought I'd ask for it. It would really simplify things for me. Users who want to sort manually could do so by disabling the option. It never hurts to ask!
|
66515
|
Tue Aug 11 17:46:33 2009 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Comment | Linux | 2.7.7-2251 | Re: Comment on: Alphabetize Quick Option filter | Yes, many thanks, Stefan, from me, too! It's really great that you respond so quickly to requests and suggestions.
And thanks to David for the fine tuning, great suggestion.
Dennis
> Thanks Stefan! Works great.
>
> > Ok, that makes sense, so I changed it to
> >
> > Sort Attribute Options Status = 1
> >
> > as you suggested.
> >
> > > (For some reason I could not add this in Dennis's thread.)
> > >
> > > I like this new feature, BUT
> > >
> > > I happen to have two Options: Options System, and Options Status.
> > >
> > > System are a very few items, whereas Status has a long list, which, like Dennis's example, can be added to.
> > > Keeping the latter in alpha order is great, but it's a shame that the cost is that Options System are also
> > > sorted alphabetically, whereas it has a natural order which it would be preferable to keep - for example (and
> > > this is made up)
> > >
> > > Options System: 3.1, NT, 2000, XP, Vista
> > >
> > > where the natural order here is chronological.
> > >
> > > Perhaps the configuration file option could be more specific, for example
> > >
> > > Sort attribute Options Status = 1
> > >
> > > which would then NOT sort Options System. If both are needed to be sorted, both should be specified, or back to
> > > the original syntax which defaults to sort *all* Options. |
66835
|
Thu Jun 3 06:14:50 2010 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Request | All | 2.7.7 | Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items? |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Hi Stefan,
I'd like to request a feature: automatic alphabetization of the items in the Quick Filter menus.
We track quite a few detector assemblies, which are produced with non-sequential designations. It would be useful if the Quick Filter list was automatically sorted alphabetically to make it more convenient for folks to find a particular item.
I know people can always search by designation but it would be handy to have this alpha sorting feature. Would it be possible to include that in a future release?
Thanks again for a *very* useful logging system!
Dennis
|
The order of items in a Quick Filter menu is exactly as in the configuration file. Like if you have items
Options Type = C, D, A, B
they are shown like that in the quick filter menu. If you want to sort them, just do the sorting yourself in the configuration file like
Options Type = A, B, C, D
I have not implemented automatic sorting since some people want a different order, like some main topics at top. So by following the order from the configuration file, everybody can be satisfied just by chaning the order in the config file.
- Stefan
|
Yes, I have been manually sorting and resorting. We have extendable attributes and the list keeps growing so I have to resort every so often. I thought perhaps a simple alphanumeric sort as an option would be popular with most users so I thought I'd ask for it. It would really simplify things for me. Users who want to sort manually could do so by disabling the option. It never hurts to ask!
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D? |
66864
|
Wed Jul 28 17:01:06 2010 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Request | All | 2.7.7 | Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items? |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Hi Stefan,
I'd like to request a feature: automatic alphabetization of the items in the Quick Filter menus.
We track quite a few detector assemblies, which are produced with non-sequential designations. It would be useful if the Quick Filter list was automatically sorted alphabetically to make it more convenient for folks to find a particular item.
I know people can always search by designation but it would be handy to have this alpha sorting feature. Would it be possible to include that in a future release?
Thanks again for a *very* useful logging system!
Dennis
|
The order of items in a Quick Filter menu is exactly as in the configuration file. Like if you have items
Options Type = C, D, A, B
they are shown like that in the quick filter menu. If you want to sort them, just do the sorting yourself in the configuration file like
Options Type = A, B, C, D
I have not implemented automatic sorting since some people want a different order, like some main topics at top. So by following the order from the configuration file, everybody can be satisfied just by chaning the order in the config file.
- Stefan
|
Yes, I have been manually sorting and resorting. We have extendable attributes and the list keeps growing so I have to resort every so often. I thought perhaps a simple alphanumeric sort as an option would be popular with most users so I thought I'd ask for it. It would really simplify things for me. Users who want to sort manually could do so by disabling the option. It never hurts to ask!
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D?
|
You need revision 2252 or later. So you have to upgrade to 2.7.8.
|
We have upgraded to 2.7.8 but this still doesn't seem to work. The quick menus are still unsorted. Does it work for you? |
66870
|
Wed Jul 28 22:03:26 2010 |
| Dennis Seitz | dseitz@berkeley.edu | Request | All | 2.7.7 | Re: alphabetize Quick Filter items? |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
Stefan Ritt wrote: |
Dennis Seitz wrote: |
|
Ok, I implemented
Sort attribute options = 1
in the current SVN revision.
|
I've tried adding this statement to my cfg file but the attributes are still unsorted in the QuickFilter menus. Was this implemented in 2.7.7?
Shouldn't an existing configuration file entry like
Options Type = C, D, A, B
be sorted in the QuickFilter menu as A B C D?
|
You need revision 2252 or later. So you have to upgrade to 2.7.8.
|
We have upgraded to 2.7.8 but this still doesn't seem to work. The quick menus are still unsorted. Does it work for you?
|
Sorry, there was a typo, you need
Sort attribute options <attribute> = 1
where <attribute> is the name of the attribute to be sorted (in case you want some attributes sorted, but not all).
|
That did the trick. That was a good idea, to give us the option of which attributes to sort, too. Thanks again for adding this feature! |
|