[Building Sakai] Announcements tool ... the logic behind modified date ...

[Matthew Jones]

Here was the jira back in 2.9.0 when "Date" was considered confusing and
changed to be "Modified Date. I believe from that discussion that was the
only thing that could really be used and have the value of the field
predictable. Beginning date is optional and part of the availability
section of the form. Creation date is not available as a column. You can
read more of the discussion on that jira.

https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-18641
https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-21108

There has been some discussion about moving Beginning Date out of the
availability section and making it a standard field, setting it to the
current date if it is not filled in. But this wouldn't fill in any dates
for any past announcements. I guess then the option of which field to use
as the default sort (beginning date, modified date or some other field)
could be provided.

There is a recent patch for 10.4 where you can set
https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-25556

sakai.announcement.release_date_first=true

And if it keeps announcements with an release date set in the future
(currently unreleased) on the top of the list. We had some issues where
instructors would set up all of their course announcements with future
dates and they wouldn't appear in any order correctly. This doesn't solve
all of the problems, but because of how the manual reordering capability
works with announcements it's hard to support manual and automatic ordering
together.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Kenwrick Chan <kchan at hawaii.edu> wrote:

> Folks,
> We had a couple of enrollment feed types issues so we only recently
> upgraded to 2.9.3. Our faculty are having issues trying to work with the
> "new" logic of "modified date" versus simply "date".  In the past it seemed
> to sort based on date created combined with beginning date.  With the "new"
> modified date a change to a previous post ripples it to the top, yes
> because it's based on date last modified (rather than the old labeled
> "Date").
>
> This logic is confusing for our faculty and has generated a fair amount of
> complaints.  I know there is only one date field in the table, would it
> make more sense to have that populated with date created and/or beginning
> date?
>
>
> As we can see in 10.x that logic has stayed the same, so is it such that
> perhaps our users are unique in complaining about this and in time it will
> simply go away?  Is that the experience at your campuses?
>
> -kenwrick
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-dev mailing list
> sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of
> "unsubscribe"
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-dev/attachments/20150402/0a566468/attachment.html