The Beta Calendar is Up

Discussions about the Calendar Tool at lds.org. Questions about the calendar on the classic site should be posted in the LUWS forum.
User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15123
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:24 pm

Alan_Brown wrote:Yes, I noticed that, too. It's actually a problem with every June. Most strange (and most annoying).


And speaking of strange, as I was testing this, the site stopped responding to me for a few minutes. I got Invalid Request no matter what I did. But now it is back up, and the strange behavior with the month of June is gone. I can schedule events for June with no problems at all.

Hmmmmmm.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

User avatar
srweight
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:55 am
Location: North Ogden UT USA
Contact:

First come first served

Postby srweight » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:28 pm

The transition from LUWS to "new" does bring up some how-to questions. I have been wondering about the move and how to handle it. If the stake tells all members we will move to "new" on Jan 1, 2011 and the wards in the stake center schedule on a "first-come-first-served basis it may be possible for a ward to tie up Saturday mornings in the gym for every day that the stake sports program will need without an end. If so then the stake may want to get there first.

lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 9644
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:43 pm

srweight wrote:If the stake tells all members we will move to "new" on Jan 1, 2011 and the wards in the stake center schedule on a "first-come-first-served basis it may be possible for a ward to tie up Saturday mornings in the gym for every day that the stake sports program will need without an end. If so then the stake may want to get there first.


Do you mean to tell me that the new calendar does not have a stake override function? [hehehe. Just kidding]

The stake should be able to get there first. They are the ones setting the transition date. Of course, the following year would be a different matter.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15123
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:54 pm

srweight wrote:The transition from LUWS to "new" does bring up some how-to questions. I have been wondering about the move and how to handle it. If the stake tells all members we will move to "new" on Jan 1, 2011 and the wards in the stake center schedule on a "first-come-first-served basis it may be possible for a ward to tie up Saturday mornings in the gym for every day that the stake sports program will need without an end. If so then the stake may want to get there first.


There are a couple of ways for a stake to address this. One is to only have one designated building scheduler for the stake center. Then there is no way for the other wards to tie up the building without the scheduler's approval. The stake controls the resource, and thus controls who is designated as a building scheduler.

Also, the calendar has the ability to block out times for wards to essentially own a resource. So the stake could say that Ward A gets the stake center's gym every Saturday from 7-9, Ward B from 9-11, and Ward C from 11-1. Then each ward is free to schedule (or not schedule) that resource in those time blocks, but not in any time block belonging to another ward. The stake can also block out any time or day ranges and then no one can schedule time in those blocks except for a stake administrator.

I would think it would be rare to designate multiple schedulers for a single building with no rule other than first-come-first-served, but if a stake wants to do that, they certainly can. I think, however, that each stake has plenty of better options for scheduling.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:56 pm

lajackson wrote:But can you create an event for June 2011?


Yup. No problem at this end. I created a date in June 8th of 2011 and it went where it was supposed to. Nothing in July and I had no problem in removing it.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?

User avatar
mfmohlma
Senior Member
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Hillsboro, OR

Postby mfmohlma » Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:39 pm

Alan_Brown wrote:And speaking of strange, as I was testing this, the site stopped responding to me for a few minutes. I got Invalid Request no matter what I did. But now it is back up, and the strange behavior with the month of June is gone. I can schedule events for June with no problems at all.

Hmmmmmm.


Someone is monitoring this thread... ;)

Actually, it appears to have been a known bug which was fixed in Version 1.4 of the calendar, which was released yesterday. It was probably just pushed public today.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15123
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Wed Sep 01, 2010 7:57 am

Alan_Brown wrote:The building scheduler issue is indeed a bug. I reported the issue with adding a Building Scheduler about 2 weeks ago using the Feedback mechanism, but when I tried it again yesterday, it was still a problem. However, I am certain that it was not always a bug, since I was able to add building schedulers prior to that -- as evidenced by the fact that the building schedulers I added back then are still listed. I just can't add or change building schedulers at this point.


FYI, this bug also seems to be fixed on the new release that went live yesterday. It's nice to see good progress being made.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:22 am

Alan_Brown wrote:FYI, this bug also seems to be fixed on the new release that went live yesterday. It's nice to see good progress being made.


I was hoping that the latest release would have addressed an issue that I'd reported a while back. When an event is scheduled on any given day and resources are assigned to it, I get a message that reports a conflict in resources except that the conflict is on an adjacent day.

Case in point. The General RS Broadcast on a Saturday in September will use the chapel, overflow, and the cultural hall (for a dinner afterwards). The next day - Sunday is Fast Sunday for our stake and I get a conflict between the two events. I've already reported this and verified that the entries are correct.

Is anyone else seeing this?
Have you read the Code of Conduct?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15123
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:09 am

techgy wrote:I was hoping that the latest release would have addressed an issue that I'd reported a while back. When an event is scheduled on any given day and resources are assigned to it, I get a message that reports a conflict in resources except that the conflict is on an adjacent day.

Case in point. The General RS Broadcast on a Saturday in September will use the chapel, overflow, and the cultural hall (for a dinner afterwards). The next day - Sunday is Fast Sunday for our stake and I get a conflict between the two events. I've already reported this and verified that the entries are correct.

Is anyone else seeing this?


The resource scheduling tests for possible conflicts. It then reports both "resource conflicts," which are hard conflicts; and "Events at other locations." The first category seems to work reliably (except for one case I'll mention later). That is the most important situation, since it prevents you from double-scheduling a resource. I have not seen hard conflicts reported for an event on another day. Is that the kind of conflict you're seeing in the specific case you mentioned?

The possible conflicts for "Events at other locations" do seem to look more broadly than is necessary; they look at adjoining days, which doesn't seem necessary, and although they do advertise that they are looking at events which are scheduled for different resources, it seems more annoying than helpful to show so many events that aren't really conflicts. Perhaps if it were labeled more clearly it would be less annoying -- for the first section, make it clear that these are hard conflicts that will stop you from scheduling on top of an existing reservation; for the second section, make it clear that these are some other events that are okay from a resource perspective, but might possibly involve some of the same people, who can't be two places at the same time, or may be frustrated that they are involved in events on consecutive days.

The one case that is a problem with hard conflict checking concerns changing a single-day event to a repeating event. If you have scheduled a resource for a single-day event and then later decide that it needs to be a repeating event, when you try to save those changes, you are told that the resource is already scheduled for that first day and so you can't save your changes. Well, duh! Of course it's scheduled for that day -- I'm the one who scheduled it. I just want to extend that schedule to multiple days in the future, of which the single day is just the first instance. I have reported this bug. The good news is that this problem doesn't occur when you are adjusting an existing repeating event -- just when you go from single to repeating.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:20 am

Alan_Brown wrote:The resource scheduling tests for possible conflicts. It then reports both "resource conflicts," which are hard conflicts; and "Events at other locations." The first category seems to work reliably (except for one case I'll mention later). That is the most important situation, since it prevents you from double-scheduling a resource. I have not seen hard conflicts reported for an event on another day. Is that the kind of conflict you're seeing in the specific case you mentioned?....


I've posted a snapshot of the screen showing the conflict report.
I've tried this multiple times and each time, depending upon what day(s) I check for conflicts, I get various reports. Sometimes it's reporting a conflict for a previous day, sometimes the report's for the next day. There doesn't seem to be any pattern to what I get. If I turn off the resource and just use "Other Location" the problem doesn't show because no resource is being used.

Once the conflict is reported I cannot save the event.
Attachments
conflicts.jpg
(68.51 KiB) Downloaded 42 times
Have you read the Code of Conduct?


Return to “Calendar”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests