[Design] Confusion after a recurrence series is "split" by making a modification and choosing "all furture events"

[Mimi Yin]

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