Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix comparisons between different dates formats #1380

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 13, 2024

Conversation

laulaz
Copy link
Member

@laulaz laulaz commented May 8, 2024

This refs #1379

@laulaz laulaz requested review from thet and petschki May 8, 2024 15:16
Copy link
Member

@petschki petschki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi, thanks for this! I could test your branch and can confirm, that removing a date works now correctly.

But adding a date which already exists is still allowed whether its in the RRULE or its added manually. I just quickly tried your screencasts but could not look into the code.

@petschki
Copy link
Member

Took a closer look and now I understand: The added dates aren't checked against an RRULE but only for already added custom RDATE entries. This is ok for me because its too much overhead to check the custom date in the backend if it already exists in the RRULE. This would be much easier if we switch to a JS rrule library to check the custom dates there ... see #1210 ... but for now I'll merge. @laulaz could you backport this also to branch 5.1.x please?

@petschki petschki merged commit 01ca324 into master May 13, 2024
3 checks passed
@petschki petschki deleted the laulaz-fix-recurrence-edition branch May 13, 2024 06:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants