Edgewall Software

Changes between Version 2 and Version 3 of Ticket #525, comment 86


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 18, 2012, 10:32:29 AM (12 years ago)
Author:
Peter Suter

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #525, comment 86

    v2 v3  
    2323Edit 2: More useful and more intuitive would be to ''carry over'' the operator to the next item if it does not have an operator of its own.
    2424
    25 ||=Old value     ||=Batch change ||=New value\\(list field)||=Summary||
    26 || foo           || +bar, baz    || foo, bar, baz          ||baz inherits + ||
    27 || foo, bar, baz || -bar, baz    || foo                    ||baz inherits - ||
    28 || foo           || bar, +baz    || bar, baz               ||bar replaces whole field, then baz is added.\\(Not really useful.)||
    29 || foo, baz      || bar, -baz    || bar                    ||bar replaces whole field, then baz is (already) removed.\\(Not really useful.)||
     25||=Old value     ||=Batch change   ||=New value\\(list field)||=Summary||
     26|| foo           || +bar, baz      || foo, bar, baz          ||baz inherits + ||
     27|| foo, bar, baz || -bar, baz      || foo                    ||baz inherits - ||
     28|| foo, bar      || -foo, bar, +baz, qux || baz, qux         ||bar inherits -, qux inherits + ||
     29|| foo           || bar, +baz, qux || bar, baz, qux          ||bar replaces whole field, qux inherits +\\(Not really useful.)||
     30|| foo, baz, qux || bar, -baz, qux || bar                    ||bar replaces whole field, qux inherits -\\(Not really useful.)||
    3031
    3132> Looking at the table, I realize that there's not really a valid use case for "+..." and "-..." for non-list fields. So yeah, simply drop the rule for those (and simply replace the old value with the batch change).