Re: Can I request that a Gramps bug report be re-assessed?
Thanks Nick. That helps a lot. I didn't grasp Dave's point as being about types of changes appropriate in different parts of the development cycle. And how that might affect guidelines assessing reports.
And the identification of how active objects relate to selectors and views id also enlightening.
Sorry that you had adverse feedback in that earlier maintenance release.
I appreciate every effort to respect performance issues. I put a lot of time into improving performance in my own code. (Different language & environment.) With a Gramps database than now has more than 20k persons, it's easy to see where every bit of optimization could make a difference.
On Tue, 2/20/18, Nick Hall <[hidden email]> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Can I request that a Gramps bug report be re-assessed?
To: [hidden email] Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018, 11:51 AM
On 20/02/18 11:32, Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users wrote:
> Was my offering an opinion on which behavior was preferable inappropriate?
It seems that the opinion is why it might be deemed a "feature" rather than a bug. Or should I have been more explicit that the bug was out-of-sync redundant code rather than the functionality?
> 0010421: Place 'Find' behavior
> Summary: the action of "Clear" button in the find Nested/Grouped Places list gives differing results (when adding a Place to an Event versus when in the main Places panel.)
This lies in a grey area somewhere between a bug and a feature request.
Views and selectors share the same data model, but their interfaces differ slightly. Clicking on a row in a view will change the active object. The view will then select the row that corresponds to the active object. Views and gramplets will respond to a change of active object, selectors will not.
Try opening the example database and filtering on the place name "fair". You will get 4 results. Now select two of these rows and click "Clear". Only the active object will remain selected and the tree expanded so that it is visible.
Your feature request is perfectly valid. I can see why this functionality would be useful, for example when selecting a building in a town when you forget the exact street number.
However, as Dave pointed out, I made a mistake in the past by implementing a feature request in a maintenance branch. Although some people liked the change, others didn't and it also had a performance impact. I ended up reverting the commit.