Demo Discussion

Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities

Discussion forum about ELOG, Page 544 of 808  Not logged in

Find |  Login |  Help

Full | Summary | Threaded | Hide attachments     -- All entries -- Last day Last 3 Days Last week Last month Last 3 Months Last 6 Months Last Year -- Category -- Info Bug report Bug fix Question Request Comment Other  6460 Entries

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 543, 544, 545 ... 806, 807, 808   Next

ID Date Icon Author Author Email Category OS ELOG Version Subject   2316   Tue Sep 11 15:30:11 2007   Steve Jones steve.jones@freescale.com Request All 2.6.2-1739 Re: Too many logbooks during user registration Stefan Ritt wrote: Steve Jones wrote: Stefan, we require registration with elog. We have quite a number of logbooks and when someone requests a login account AND elects to register with all of the logbooks, the resulting URL is apparently too long for browsers to handle when the admins click on the link embedded in the email notification. For example, FireFox (latest ver) appears to truncate the URL *after* submission (the correct URL is there before submission). My question: Is it possible to limit - or remove - the checkboxes that the user can select during registration? I realize that this is a browser issue but I doubt I can persuade those guys to fix FireFox. Thanks. I changed the current SVN version (#1909) to show only the list of logbooks if there are ten or less logbooks, in order not to make the URL too long. On the activation by the administrator, the list of subscribed logbooks appears as previously, but all are unchecked. So it's the task of the administrator to enable subscriptions or not. Quote: So the list is shown to the one requesting the registration? Would it be possible to have an option that, when selected, simply did not list any logbooks? I can see a customer becoming confused if they did not see their logbook listed. Just turn off the selection completely. Otherwise, this will work but I fear will generate more questions as in "Why isn't logbook <blah> listed?" Thanks!   2317   Tue Sep 11 21:25:11 2007   Stefan Ritt stefan.ritt@psi.ch Request All 2.6.2-1739 Re: Too many logbooks during user registration Steve Jones wrote: So the list is shown to the one requesting the registration? Would it be possible to have an option that, when selected, simply did not list any logbooks? I can see a customer becoming confused if they did not see their logbook listed. Just turn off the selection completely. Otherwise, this will work but I fear will generate more questions as in "Why isn't logbook <blah> listed?" I agree, that's inconsistent. So I removed the logbook list completely (SVN revision 1914) and added a note on the user notification that they should click 'config' to subscribe to any logbook.   2033   Thu Nov 2 18:02:44 2006   David Spindler dsspindler@gmail.com Bug report Windows 2.6.2-1734 Bug? Password file location changed I just tried to upgrade from 2.6.1-1633 to 2.6.2-1734. Whenever I tried to access the elog, it showed my password to be invalid. I tried this on 2 machines and same results. I did notice on the second one when I started it from a command prompt that it was creating a new empty password file in a different location. I have a password file called pwd.txt. It resides in the main elog directory, in my case, c:\elog, along with the elgod.exe and elogd.cfg. Apparently, the new version looks for it in the logbooks directory. I adjusted my path to the file and it works fine. I am reporting this as a bug because it is my guess that this is not an expected result. I would expect the old elogd.cfg file to work without altering in the newer version. Thanks, keep up the great work, Stefan. You have a great program. David Spindler   2034   Thu Nov 2 18:10:07 2006   David Spindler dsspindler@gmail.com Bug report Windows 2.6.2-1734 Re: Bug? Password file location changed David Spindler wrote: I just tried to upgrade from 2.6.1-1633 to 2.6.2-1734. Whenever I tried to access the elog, it showed my password to be invalid. I tried this on 2 machines and same results. I did notice on the second one when I started it from a command prompt that it was creating a new empty password file in a different location. I have a password file called pwd.txt. It resides in the main elog directory, in my case, c:\elog, along with the elgod.exe and elogd.cfg. Apparently, the new version looks for it in the logbooks directory. I adjusted my path to the file and it works fine. I am reporting this as a bug because it is my guess that this is not an expected result. I would expect the old elogd.cfg file to work without altering in the newer version. Thanks, keep up the great work, Stefan. You have a great program. David Spindler I also just noticed that the text files I use for presetting the text window also have to be in the logbooks directory.   2036   Thu Nov 2 23:17:10 2006   Steve Jones steve.jones@freescale.com Bug report Windows 2.6.2-1734 Re: Bug? Password file location changed David Spindler wrote: David Spindler wrote: I just tried to upgrade from 2.6.1-1633 to 2.6.2-1734. Whenever I tried to access the elog, it showed my password to be invalid. I tried this on 2 machines and same results. I did notice on the second one when I started it from a command prompt that it was creating a new empty password file in a different location. I have a password file called pwd.txt. It resides in the main elog directory, in my case, c:\elog, along with the elgod.exe and elogd.cfg. Apparently, the new version looks for it in the logbooks directory. I adjusted my path to the file and it works fine. I am reporting this as a bug because it is my guess that this is not an expected result. I would expect the old elogd.cfg file to work without altering in the newer version. Thanks, keep up the great work, Stefan. You have a great program. David Spindler I also just noticed that the text files I use for presetting the text window also have to be in the logbooks directory. Quote: The relocation was a documented change that Stefan made intentionally. Yes, it caught me too   2039   Fri Nov 3 14:40:36 2006   David Spindler dsspindler@gmail.com Bug report Windows 2.6.2-1734 Re: Bug? Password file location changed Steve Jones wrote: David Spindler wrote: David Spindler wrote: I just tried to upgrade from 2.6.1-1633 to 2.6.2-1734. Whenever I tried to access the elog, it showed my password to be invalid. I tried this on 2 machines and same results. I did notice on the second one when I started it from a command prompt that it was creating a new empty password file in a different location. I have a password file called pwd.txt. It resides in the main elog directory, in my case, c:\elog, along with the elgod.exe and elogd.cfg. Apparently, the new version looks for it in the logbooks directory. I adjusted my path to the file and it works fine. I am reporting this as a bug because it is my guess that this is not an expected result. I would expect the old elogd.cfg file to work without altering in the newer version. Thanks, keep up the great work, Stefan. You have a great program. David Spindler I also just noticed that the text files I use for presetting the text window also have to be in the logbooks directory. Quote: The relocation was a documented change that Stefan made intentionally. Yes, it caught me too Thanks. I checked the changelog and the documentation for any such changes but did not see them. I just looked again, and still do not see them. Anyway, I know what to expect, now, and will adjust. Again, thanks!   2048   Tue Nov 7 09:22:52 2006   Stefan Ritt stefan.ritt@psi.ch Bug report Windows 2.6.2-1734 Re: Bug? Password file location changed David Spindler wrote: Thanks. I checked the changelog and the documentation for any such changes but did not see them. I just looked again, and still do not see them. Anyway, I know what to expect, now, and will adjust. Again, thanks! That change was actually made in SVN revision 1708 on Aug. 1st, 2006, which was after the release of 2.6.2. So it will be made official in 2.6.3 and documented accordingly.   2084   Mon Nov 20 16:23:37 2006   Fergus Lynch flynch@alternativenetworks.com Question Windows 2.6.2-1734 $long_name in Moptions Hi, Is there a way of having $long_name in 'Moptions'? We use ELOG (amongst other things!) to allocate work out to Developers (who are all configured as ELOG users) I would like to use 'checkbox' functionality to allocate out a task to more than one developer. Currently only a single developer is chosen from a drop down list. Thanks Fergus

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 543, 544, 545 ... 806, 807, 808   Next

ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6