https://www.redmine.org/https://www.redmine.org/favicon.ico?16793021292009-04-03T19:59:38ZRedmineRedmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=84442009-04-03T19:59:38ZNanda P
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/attachments/1825">TwoDigitYear.JPG</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/attachments/download/1825/TwoDigitYear.JPG">TwoDigitYear.JPG</a> added</li></ul><p><img src="https://www.redmine.org/attachments/download/1825/TwoDigitYear.JPG" alt="" /></p> Redmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=84752009-04-05T10:07:04ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul></ul><p>That's how the ruby Date#parse method behaves:</p>
<pre>
irb(main):003:0> Date.parse("09-02-04").year
=> 9
irb(main):004:0> Date.parse("2009-02-04").year
=> 2009
</pre>
<p>I don't know if it's worth hacking it.</p> Redmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=84992009-04-05T13:18:41ZNanda P
<ul></ul><p>If possible, Lock the date fields from entering the values manually & let the user to select from the Calendar control will prevent this issue.</p>
<p>In my observation, most of the users are using the Calendar control.</p> Redmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=453182013-02-06T09:21:41ZDaniel Felix
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Confirmed</i></li><li><strong>Target version</strong> set to <i>Candidate for next minor release</i></li><li><strong>Affected version (unused)</strong> changed from <i>0.8.0</i> to <i>2.2.2</i></li><li><strong>Affected version</strong> set to <i>2.2.2</i></li></ul><p>This is still reproduceable. I checked this and can confirm this on current trunk.</p>
<p>Jean Philippe wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I don't know if it's worth hacking it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The validation should be improved or the datefield should only allow 4 digit years. The method doesn't need to be hacked. But it should be validated in the correct way to prepend such an entry.</p>
<p>I set it as a candidate for the next minor release as this could cause misleading timelogs.</p> Redmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=460232013-02-24T12:29:53ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Confirmed</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>Jean-Philippe Lang</i></li><li><strong>Target version</strong> changed from <i>Candidate for next minor release</i> to <i>2.3.0</i></li><li><strong>Resolution</strong> set to <i>Fixed</i></li></ul><p>Fixed in <a class="changeset" title="Time entry with 2 digits year should not validate (#3107)." href="https://www.redmine.org/projects/redmine/repository/svn/revisions/11472">r11472</a>. Same validations than issue start/due dates are applied and "09-02-04" is no longer considered as valid.</p> Redmine - Defect #3107: Issue with two digit year on Logtimehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/3107?journal_id=464772013-03-09T09:11:58ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Resolved</i> to <i>Closed</i></li></ul><p>Merged.</p>