After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 231166 - do not start appointment time drop-down at midnight
do not start appointment time drop-down at midnight
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Calendar
2.8.x
Other All
: Urgent critical
: Future
Assigned To: Milan Crha
Evolution QA team
: 263870 266629 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 264959
 
 
Reported: 2002-09-24 22:54 UTC by Damian Ivereigh
Modified: 2013-09-13 00:54 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
proposed evo patch (4.48 KB, patch)
2007-09-18 08:43 UTC, Milan Crha
rejected Details | Review
proposed evo patch ][ (9.24 KB, patch)
2007-10-25 10:14 UTC, Milan Crha
committed Details | Review

Description Damian Ivereigh 2002-09-24 22:54:47 UTC
Currently if you book an appointment late in the day, it is a bit of pain
to scroll down the long list of times - could the list be centered around
the currently selected time.

To reproduce:-
1. From the Calendar window, click on a time late in the day, say 4pm, to
set an appointment.
2. The default start time is now 4pm, and the end time is 4:30pm.
3. Now change the end time to say 5pm by clicking on the drop down arrow to
the right of the time.

What actually happens:-
The drop down appears and the currently selected time (4:30pm) is way down
the list - probably off the bottom.

What I would expect:-
The currently selected time (4:30pm) to be in the middle - i.e. to have the
pull-down already scrolled so that 4:30pm is in the middle. Thus making it
easier to select 5pm.
Comment 1 André Klapper 2004-12-09 14:01:04 UTC
still valid in evolution-2.0.2.0.200412060900-0.snap.ximian.10.1.
this one really sucks.
i'll target this to 2.3 since to me it's a great and not-to-hard
improvement for the user...ximian guys: please contradict me. ;-)
Comment 2 André Klapper 2004-12-15 16:28:30 UTC
changing target milestone from 2.3 to 2.1 according to duplicate bug
263870.
Comment 3 André Klapper 2004-12-15 16:28:52 UTC
*** bug 263870 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 André Klapper 2004-12-27 18:35:15 UTC
*** bug 266629 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 André Klapper 2004-12-27 18:36:01 UTC
please also take a look at bug 266629, it's nearly the same with 
scheduling meetings.
Comment 6 Calum Benson 2005-07-28 10:40:50 UTC
Apologies for any spam... cc'ing usability-maint on all Evolution usability
bugs. Filter on EVO-USABILITY-SPAM to ignore.
Comment 7 André Klapper 2005-08-21 00:11:41 UTC
still valid in 2.3.7
Comment 8 André Klapper 2005-09-13 22:47:48 UTC
still in 2.4.0, retargetting from 2.3 to 2.5.
Comment 9 Veerapuram Varadhan 2005-12-20 12:12:20 UTC
With the "For" implementation in event-editor, this bug becomes obsolete.
Comment 10 Harish Krishnaswamy 2006-01-05 06:44:23 UTC
The problem does not get solved by the new 'for' implementation. Please remember you might want to change the start time more often than the duration.
Comment 11 André Klapper 2006-07-14 21:15:39 UTC
proposal: dropdown time menu should begin at the "day begins:" setting under "edit > preferences > calendar and tasks > general > work week".
Comment 12 mailforwho 2007-07-16 12:50:56 UTC
This bug is still 'at large' in Evolution 2.10.1

I'd love it to be fixed! 

Andre Klapper's suggestion looks excellent ("proposal: dropdown time menu should begin at the "day begins:" setting under
"edit > preferences > calendar and tasks > general > work week".")

Comment 13 Milan Crha 2007-09-18 08:43:21 UTC
Created attachment 95780 [details] [review]
proposed evo patch

for evolution;

It is not used everywhere, but I think that's no problem. There are only couple things I need to mention: someone could suppose that the hours after midnight are for next day, but they aren't. (there is 9...23:30, 0:00, .... 8:30). Also, it uses only starting hour, not a minute, from preferences.
Comment 14 Srinivasa Ragavan 2007-09-27 18:18:16 UTC
Milan, Im not very clear on your patch. What does it do really?
Comment 15 Milan Crha 2007-10-01 07:05:01 UTC
It does the behavior as described in comment #11 and approved in comment #12, it fills the combo with time always starting at 'start time' and rounds to the end time, even the end time can be smaller than start time, in that case, it moves through midnight. My example above is for "day begins: 9:xx" and the interval is set to "9, 9", so it creates items in combo like "9:00, 9:30, ... 23:30, 0:00, ... 8:30". In other words, it only changes starting time in the combo, nothing else.
Comment 16 André Klapper 2007-10-01 10:35:32 UTC
for "day begins: 9:xx" i would actually prefer if the *focus* in the dropdown list is set to 9:00 and the item list still starts at 0:00. it seems unlogical to me that if i want to change the start time from 9:00 to 8:30, i don't have to choose one item up, but 47 items down.
Comment 17 Milan Crha 2007-10-02 13:01:30 UTC
You've right, it's strange, but with GtkComboBoxEntry it looks very weired, nothing nice around, so I think it's not that what we want. (I like classic combo with scrollbar to move quickly with a list, not those arrow on top and bottom with slow movement). Even it is deprecated component. I saw that it is selected in old GtkCombo, but not scrolled in a proper place. So it's the opportunity to move with the scrollbar there, but god knows how :) or maybe other developer...
Comment 18 Srinivasa Ragavan 2007-10-03 05:20:34 UTC
Precisely, I remember I worked on this bug year or two back and found that it is a  broken gtk+ bug. Unfortunately we are using a deprecated widget.
Comment 19 Milan Crha 2007-10-25 10:14:20 UTC
Created attachment 97833 [details] [review]
proposed evo patch ][

for evolution;

Migrate from gtk_combo to gtk_com_box_entry for time_combo. Also added selecting item from list on change, if possible, so you can type your time and if it is in a list, then you've got right item selected, when popup.
Comment 20 Srinivasa Ragavan 2007-11-05 07:54:11 UTC
Awesome. I think it doesn't break anything. Commit to head/stable
Comment 21 Milan Crha 2007-11-05 12:08:23 UTC
Committed to trunk. Committed revision 34505.
Committed to stable. Committed revision 34506.
Comment 22 Matthew Barnes 2007-11-26 17:36:42 UTC
We need to either revert this or find a different solution for stable.

The patch uses gtk_cell_layout_get_cells(), which is a new function in GTK+ 2.12.  The stable branch is limited to GTK+ 2.10.  It's fine for trunk, but we can't go bumping our GTK+ requirement in a stable update.

Increasing priority and severity, and reopening.
Comment 23 André Klapper 2007-11-26 17:45:42 UTC
please revert the commit to stable then, i'd say.
Comment 24 Matthew Barnes 2007-11-26 18:01:09 UTC
I agree.  Unfortunately I don't see any other way to get to a GtkComboBoxEntry's text renderer but through gtk_cell_layout_get_cells().  Bit of a shortcoming in the GTK+ API if you ask me.
Comment 25 Matthew Barnes 2007-11-26 18:38:30 UTC
The stable branch compiles fine for me with the patch reverted.  I don't *think* there's any side-effects to reverting the patch but Milan would know better.

I'll leave it to Srini and Andre to decide if this warrants a 2.12.2.1 release.
I haven't committed anything yet.
Comment 26 André Klapper 2007-11-26 18:53:48 UTC
hmm. i'd say: wait for complaints, and revert for 2.12.3 (personal opinion, not release-team view.)
i don't think there's a distro shipping evo 2.12 as part of gnome 2.20 without shipping gtk 2.12 (many parts of gnome 2.20 depend on gtk 2.12).
Comment 27 André Klapper 2007-11-26 18:54:39 UTC
oops, should have been an "and **if required**, revert for 2.12.3", so only if there are complaints
Comment 28 Matthew Barnes 2007-11-26 20:45:21 UTC
> oops, should have been an "and **if required**, revert for 2.12.3", so only if
> there are complaints

If we leave it in place then we need to bump the GTK+ requirement in configure.in, and that's mostly where my concern lies.  I doubt I would have noticed the problem had I not been backporting 2.12.2 to a GNOME 2.16 platform (for RHEL).
Comment 29 Srinivasa Ragavan 2007-11-27 05:05:15 UTC
I think, we should revert it from stable for consistency purposes. I don't think bumping the Gtk+ version is right at this late stage. Milan, just revert it for stable alone.
Comment 30 Milan Crha 2007-11-27 09:33:24 UTC
OK, reverted in stable. Committed revision 34593.