gmb wrote:
> Comments are a hard boundary for grouping activity, too, so I think
> that maybe just using approximatedate() might not be sufficient,
> since we need to establish which activity goes with which
> comment. (Note that I'm writing this off the top of my head and
> haven't looked at the approximateddate() code).
Good point. I was just thinking about seeing the activities between
the comments, as we're seeing more of now because of the AJAXification
of the bugs page, but lumped together, and de-duped.
Perhaps grouping with a related comment can be considered first, for
activity within a static ~5 minute window following the comment, then
the approximatedate() grouping could be applied.
gmb wrote:
> Comments are a hard boundary for grouping activity, too, so I think
> that maybe just using approximatedate() might not be sufficient,
> since we need to establish which activity goes with which
> comment. (Note that I'm writing this off the top of my head and
> haven't looked at the approximateddate() code).
Good point. I was just thinking about seeing the activities between
the comments, as we're seeing more of now because of the AJAXification
of the bugs page, but lumped together, and de-duped.
Perhaps grouping with a related comment can be considered first, for
activity within a static ~5 minute window following the comment, then
the approximatedate() grouping could be applied.