[7.450][BUG][CONFIRMED] Time Events Definition issue

Hello all. I'm not sure if this is a bug or I just don't understand how it works.

When I tried to create a recurring event with the following "Start time" and "End Time", it fails with the following message:

"You did not enter all required data, or one or more settings are syntactically invalid."

Start Time: 21:00
End Time: 6:00

If I understand this configuration correctly, the time event starts at 9:00pm and ends at 6:00am the next day, which is what I need.

The problem appears to occur when the "End Time" is set beyond 23:59; ie, 00:00, 00:01, 2:00, 5:00, etc. However, if I create this into a single event, it takes the "End Time" without any problem.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
jav

0 Billybob over 16 years ago

I believe you found a bug. As long as the time frame is on the same day its fine. If you want any time events for the night shift, that starts before midnight and rolls over to the next day, you are out of luck. Screenshot attached...
- bug.JPG
- View
- Hide
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 RFCat_vk_01 over 16 years ago in reply to Billybob

Hi Javelin,
there is another thread on the same subject. But it doesn't raise the issue of a bug in not stopping you entering a smaller value for your end time.

Okay the rules are you must end you time definition the same day you start it.

In your case 2100-2359 and 0000-0600. I haven't tried 2100-0000 which is what would be required to give a seamless transistion. All my definitions are based on 2359 end and 0000 start when they roll past midnight.

Ian M
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

0 Astaro Beta Bot over 16 years ago in reply to RFCat_vk_01

Astaro Beta Report
--------------------------------
Version: 7.450
Type: BUG
State: CONFIRMED
Reporter: javelin
Contributor: 
MantisID: 10787 
--------------------------------

0 andyk007 over 16 years ago in reply to Astaro Beta Bot

Hi I forwarded it to our development team to fix it
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 ischwarze over 16 years ago

This behaviour is unchanged since 7.000:
The end time must be later then the start time,
or else the object is invalid.

The proposed semantics may even be slightly confusing:
If i say start 23:59, end 18:30, on Tuesdays, is that supposed to mean:
- Tuesday 23:59 to the following week, Tuesday 18:30
- Monday 23:59 to Tuesday 18:30
- Tuesday 23:59 to Wednesday 18:30 (What? But i said on *Tuesday*!)

At least this needs to be clarified in the explaining text in the WebAdmin and in the manual when implementing anything.

If something requires changes to the manual, it's not a bug fix, but a feature request. [;)]
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 RFCat_vk_01 over 16 years ago in reply to ischwarze

Hi,
while you are talking about documentation needing to be updated, there is an actual bug that allows you to put in a finish time earlier than the start.

Ian M
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel