Page MenuHomePhabricator

Add the ability to specify custom date formats in Special:Preferences.
Open, LowPublicFeature

Description

Author: gastonrabbit

Description:
Rather than limiting users to pre-selected date formats, perhaps users could
specify their own formats using the PHP date() format (as in phpBB) or a similar
format.


Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement

Details

Reference
bz1784

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Low.Nov 21 2014, 8:19 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz1784.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
  • Bug 12280 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Should be pretty easy with the new prefs (just change 'radio' to 'selectorother'), just need a way to validate date inputs.

MZMcBride added subscribers: SamB, Bawolff, Nikerabbit and 3 others.

I've merged the newer tasks into this older task. It feels incredibly rude to me to let a feature request like this sit for 11 years and then tell the author that it's a duplicate of a newer task.

I've merged the newer tasks into this older task. It feels incredibly rude to me to let a feature request like this sit for 11 years and then tell the author that it's a duplicate of a newer task.

Merging / duping to task with longest and/or most recent discussion and/or most details is common practice...

(btw: Asking and not waiting for the answer but taking an action instead feels a bit rude to me OTOH...)

I've merged the newer tasks into this older task. It feels incredibly rude to me to let a feature request like this sit for 11 years and then tell the author that it's a duplicate of a newer task.

Merging / duping to task with longest and/or most recent discussion and/or most details is common practice...

Why would merging to the most recent discussion make sense? So we can completely disregard and bury all past discussions? You can copy and paste relevant details or comments to the older task if necessary.

(btw: Asking and not waiting for the answer but taking an action instead feels a bit rude to me OTOH...)

It's the wiki process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle. You boldly merged this task into a newer task and I reverted. Now we can discuss.

I've merged the newer tasks into this older task. It feels incredibly rude to me to let a feature request like this sit for 11 years and then tell the author that it's a duplicate of a newer task.

Merging / duping to task with longest and/or most recent discussion and/or most details is common practice...

Why would merging to the most recent discussion make sense? So we can completely disregard and bury all past discussions? You can copy and paste relevant details or comments to the older task if necessary.

Ie. because newest discussions reflect the actual status quo of the software?

(btw: Asking and not waiting for the answer but taking an action instead feels a bit rude to me OTOH...)

It's the wiki process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle. You boldly merged this task into a newer task and I reverted. Now we can discuss.

You first asked. Then you didn't even wait for a reply and perform action. This is not Wikipedia btw.
Anyway, not worth to discuss this further as long as at least one is opened and all others merged into that one.

You first asked. Then you didn't even wait for a reply and perform action. This is not Wikipedia btw.

Sure, the question was somewhat rhetorical. And/or I answered it myself. :-)

I say "it's rude to merge older tasks into newer tasks" and you reply "this is common practice" and I get confused because you're refuting an argument that I didn't make. Something can be both rude and common.

I say "my actions are part of a behavior pattern called bold, revert, discuss" and you reply that "Phabricator is not Wikipedia" and I get confused because you're again refuting an argument that I didn't make. Simply because something is discussed on Wikipedia does not make it inapplicable to other environments. (This pattern is also documented on Meta-Wiki, for what it's worth: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bold,_revert,_discuss.)

DannyS712 changed the subtype of this task from "Task" to "Feature Request".Mar 29 2020, 9:03 PM