[rt-users] Date Custom Field in RT 4

[Wayne Thursby]

Kenn,
I'm not sure how the 3.8 custom patch stores its information, but all RT 4
requires is a string in the "Content" field of ObjectCustomFieldValues of
the form "YYYY-MM-DD". I wrote a quick script to convert our user input of
"MM/DD/YY" to the other format, and simply changed the custom field type to
Date, and everything worked as expected.

As long as the custom patch used a consistent format and stored its values
the same way as other custom fields, conversion should be straightforward.

Wayne Thursby
System Administrator
Healthcare Management Enterprises, Inc.

(p.s. sorry for off-list reply)


On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Kenneth Crocker <kfcrocker at lbl.gov> wrote:

> Kevin,
>
> Well, I guess that means I'll have a lot of DB work to do to preserve the
> CF Dates when we upgrade to 4.0.
> ;-).
>
> Kenn
> LBNL
>
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Kevin Falcone <falcone at bestpractical.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 02:02:58PM -0700, Kenneth Crocker wrote:
>> >    That's odd. I use Emmanuel Lacour's code for 3.8 and I don't have
>> this problem. My users can
>>
>> Kenn, the 3.8 date custom field patch and the 4.0 datetime custom
>> field types have very little in common.
>>
>> In fact, there really isn't an upgrade path between the two due to the
>> various bugs in the patch and general improvements in Custom Fields in
>> 4.0
>>
>> -kevin
>>
>> >    enter "2011/11/25" or "20/22/2011" or pick a date from the Calendar
>> pop-up and it is always
>> >    interpreted correctly into our preferenced format of yyyy-mm-dd. DId
>> you set a default date
>> >    format preference in your configurations? Ours drops the time element
>> (since we really don't
>> >    care what time something was done).
>> >
>> >    Kenn
>> >    LBNL
>> >
>> >    On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Wayne Thursby <[1]
>> wayne.thursby at hcmeinc.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >      The date custom field is a welcomed addition, and opens up a lot of
>> possibilities.
>> >      Everything works great, but I've noticed one assumption it makes
>> that is, at least in my
>> >      case, an incorrect one.
>> >
>> >      Instead of selecting dates from calendars, my users type in dates
>> manually. I am in America,
>> >      so this follows the (admittedly silly) format of "MM/DD/YY"
>> >
>> >      If the users manually type in a date such as the 25th of August,
>> 2010 as "8/25/10", the date
>> >      is correctly interpreted by the custom field.
>> >
>> >      However, when a more ambiguous date is entered, such as the 9th of
>> August, 2010, the date is
>> >      incorrectly parsed as being in the international (and more
>> rational) format of "DD/MM/YY".
>> >      This turns the user's intended input, "8/9/10" into meaning the 8th
>> of September, 2010.
>> >
>> >      Computers are typically easier to configure than users. Is the
>> default format for date
>> >      CustomFields configurable? If not, should I file a feature request?
>> >      Wayne Thursby
>> >      System Administrator
>> >      Healthcare Management Enterprises, Inc.
>> >
>> > References
>> >
>> >    Visible links
>> >    1. mailto:wayne.thursby at hcmeinc.com
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20110518/d2273262/attachment.htm>