Defect #14846

Problem for setting issue B follows issue A with N-days delay

Added by Jeffrey Lee over 4 years ago. Updated almost 4 years ago.

Status:NewStart date:
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:


Target version:Candidate for next minor release
Resolution: Affected version:


I found following problem when set delay for one issue.
If the start date of the following issue is Saturday, the system will move the start date to next Monday automatically.
However, if the start date of the following issue is others (across the weekend), the system will not take non-working days into consideration.
Please check the following example.
Is it a bug or my setting issue?

  • Non-working in my system is Saturday and Sunday.
  • Issue A: 2013/09/02(Mon.)~2013/09/03(Tue.)
  • Set issue B follows issue A with N-days delay
    • N=1, Issue B start date: 2013/09/05(Thu.) => Correct
    • N=3, Issue B start date: 2013/09/09(Mon.) => Correct
    • N=4, Issue B start date: 2013/09/09(Mon.) => Incorrect, SHOULD be 2013/09/10
    • N=6, Issue B start date: 2013/09/10(Tue.) => Incorrect, SHOULD be 2013/09/12

System information:

  Redmine version                2.3.2.stable
  Ruby version                   1.9.3-p448 (2013-06-27) [x86_64-linux]
  Rails version                  3.2.13
  Environment                    production
  Database adapter               Mysql2
Redmine plugins:
  clipboard_image_paste          1.7
  redmine_projects_accordion     0.1.0
  redmine_tab                    0.4.0
  redmine_theme_changer          0.1.0
  redmine_watcher_groups         0.0.2git
  redmine_work_time              0.2.8
  timelog_timer                  2.0.0

14846.patch Magnifier (3.25 KB) Felix Schäfer, 2014-03-10 23:11


#1 Updated by Toshi MARUYAMA over 4 years ago

  • Category set to Issues

#2 Updated by Felix Schäfer almost 4 years ago

One of our (Planio) customers noticed this bug too. We can confirm that the calculation of the start date of following issues does not take the "non-working days" setting into account.

The attached patch solves this and adds a test for this behavior.

#3 Updated by Etienne Massip almost 4 years ago

  • Target version set to Candidate for next minor release

Also available in: Atom PDF