Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

custom queries #755

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

tarnung
Copy link
Collaborator

@tarnung tarnung commented Nov 27, 2021

Basic setup for predefined queries. Code still very messy but working.

Define queries in the settings menu to have easy access to them in the search popup.
Queries are subdivided into contextual, file-local and global queries. Contextual queries are not user defined, but appear when fixed criteria are met (currently only list of activ clocks).

Feedback is very welcome before I start to clean up the code changes a bit.

@munen
Copy link
Collaborator

munen commented Nov 27, 2021

This is an exciting UX concept in that it allows for different scopes with different queries that are available at all times.

It's completely different from the bookmark feature for search, but it could be precious for people with many projects that want different scopes for various searches.

On a first try, I like it and am stoked that you've already come up with the next major epic in a usable PR! 🙏 🙇

@tarnung
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tarnung commented Nov 29, 2021

I started out with the "bookmark search" feature in mind, but I started to build from the "stored query" that we introduced for the clock list.

I'm not sure yet if this feature is useful. I have it on staging and i'll see if I use it at all.
There's the possibility that a "bookmark search" feature could be much more flexible and quicker to use.

@munen
Copy link
Collaborator

munen commented Dec 5, 2021

I'm not sure yet if this feature is useful. I have it on staging, and I'll see if I use it at all.
There's the possibility that a "bookmark search" feature could be much more flexible and quicker to use.

It's pretty awesome that you've implemented both options!

The way you've implemented the bookmarks feature is straightforward (in UI surface and code), so it was trivial for me to merge right away.

I think I'll use it more than the custom queries. It seems simpler for me as a user. Given that the organice search syntax is quite straightforward, the actual search string is a good name for the bookmark, too.

However, custom queries could prove more powerful for a power user. Additionally, you've put a lot of effort into both options, and I'm not against merging the custom queries. So I'll leave the PR open until you give some feedback on your insights on whether or not you're going to make use of custom queries personally. If you do, then this feature will undoubtedly land in master!

@tarnung
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tarnung commented Dec 5, 2021

I'll use the bookmark feature for a bit. If it does most of what I want, there is no need for another concept. Don't expect feedback on this anytime soon. I guess it does not hurt to let this sit around as a draft pr for the time being.

@munen
Copy link
Collaborator

munen commented Dec 5, 2021

I'll use the bookmark feature for a bit. If it does most of what I want, there is no need for another concept. Don't expect feedback on this anytime soon. I guess it does not hurt to let this sit around as a draft pr for the time being.

It does not hurt at all. Take all the time you need!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants