Opened 12 years ago

Closed 12 years ago

Last modified 8 years ago

#402 closed defect (fixed)

Chat: shows "share or invite" hint even on resume of shared instance

Reported by: sascha_silbe Owned by: alsroot
Priority: Unspecified by Maintainer Milestone:
Component: Chat Version: Git as of bugdate
Severity: Blocker Keywords: r+
Cc: FGrose, eben Distribution/OS: Unspecified
Bug Status: Resolved

Description

Chat shows the usual hint about sharing with neighbourhood or inviting someone even if a previously-shared instance in resumed.

Attachments (1)

sugar-402.patch (911 bytes) - added by alsroot 12 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (18)

comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by FGrose

  • Bug Status changed from Unconfimed to New
  • Cc FGrose eben added
  • Distribution/OS changed from Ubuntu to Unspecified

The Off-line/Shared highlight times out. It may be a feature to remind the user.

More discussion on this design...

comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by erikos

  • Milestone changed from Unspecified by Release Team to 0.84
  • Severity changed from Unspecified to Major

I would like to see this fixed - might consider looking at #525 as well.

comment:3 follow-up: Changed 12 years ago by eben

I'm not sure I see this as a bug. There might be better ways to handle it, but removing the alert might not be it.

A better system would actually recognize that the instance has been shared in the past, and provide the option to resume the chat, automatically inviting the former participants. In fact, this could/should be a Sugar thing (opposed to a Chat thing), by which any activity resumed gave an option (in the launcher!?) to resume it with the former participants, thus automatically sending them invitations to join. That approach prevents redundant code, limits developer hassle, and keeps the invitation step in the trusted shell.

If all of that was built within Sugar, then I would see the presence of the current alert a "bug". Chat should then recognize when an instance is a fresh one and provide the alert, and skip it for resumed instances (aware that they've already been prompted to share) with the assumption that the intent is to review or copy the conversation, and not continue it.

comment:4 Changed 12 years ago by sascha_silbe

I consider the current behaviour a bug. There are two different indicators for the "shared" status and they disagree:

  1. The "Private/Neighbourhood" listbox that's greyed out and shows "Neighbourhood", i.e. indicating that the current session is shared.
  2. The "you need to go online" hint that indicates the current session is NOT shared.

I don't know for sure which one is correct, but they obviously can't both be right.

comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by erikos

  • Severity changed from Major to Blocker

I would like to see that fixed - can someone look into that? (I think Morgan is busy with other stuff currently)

comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

  • Owner changed from morgs to alsroot
  • Status changed from new to assigned

comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

Replying to eben:

A better system would actually recognize that the instance has been shared in the past, and provide the option to resume the chat, automatically inviting the former participants. In fact, this could/should be a Sugar thing (opposed to a Chat thing), by which any activity resumed gave an option (in the launcher!?) to resume it with the former participants, thus automatically sending them invitations to join. That approach prevents redundant code, limits developer hassle, and keeps the invitation step in the trusted shell.

I've created #669 for that reason

Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

comment:8 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

  • Keywords r? added

comment:9 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

  • Owner changed from alsroot to morgs

comment:10 Changed 12 years ago by erikos

As Eben pointed out, Sugar should ideally offer the option to re-share an entry that has been shared before. As currently entries are shared directly (like previously shared Browse or Write) we should do the same in Chat and do the propper fix for 0.86 I guess.

So I think the patch provided by Aleksey looks good. What do you think, Tomeu?

comment:11 Changed 12 years ago by erikos

  • Keywords r+ added; r? removed

Tomeu gave as well the r+ on irc. I have filed #671 for the better handling in 0.86 described by Eben.

comment:12 Changed 12 years ago by erikos

  • Bug Status changed from New to Needinfo

Morgan, can either you release a new version of chat - or give one of us access to your repo?

comment:13 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

  • Owner changed from morgs to alsroot

comment:14 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

  • Bug Status changed from Needinfo to Resolved
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from assigned to closed

Well, I was thinking a lot comparing all pro and contras..
and finally decided to apply this not trivial patch!

comment:15 follow-up: Changed 12 years ago by erikos

Where was it pushed to? It does not seem to be in git.

comment:16 in reply to: ↑ 15 Changed 12 years ago by alsroot

Replying to erikos:

Where was it pushed to? It does not seem to be in git.

today is 1st April

comment:17 Changed 8 years ago by godiard

  • Milestone 0.84 deleted

Milestone 0.84 deleted

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.