Edit song in schedule edits in database for next run

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1.Add existing song from DB into schedule
2.Edit the song in the schedule 
3.Restart Quelea
4.Add the same song from the DB into the schedule
5.The edits done in the schedule appear in the song in the DB.

This seems a little counter-intuitive, as it seems that the update should be 
done only to the song in the schedule, and not the database. 

Was this intentional? If so, should we possibly find a way to make it a little 
more intuitive?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by grga...@gmail.com on 6 Dec 2014 at 10:56

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hmm, this is an interesting one - yes, it's intentional and was like this from 
the beginning (I and many others I knew when first designing Quelea found it 
rather unintuitive that editing the song in the schedule in various other 
packages didn't persist the changes to the database!)

I don't think I want to change this behaviour, at least not by default (though 
of course you're more than welcome to in a branch, it should be an easy case of 
just removing the line to update the database whenever a song is edited from 
the schedule.)

Always after suggestions though, so is there any UI change you'd suggest to 
make this behaviour seem more expected?

Original comment by berry...@gmail.com on 6 Dec 2014 at 11:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

That's cool! (It's actually already done over in the other thread, because I 
thought it was a bug :) )

Maybe it would be worth having a toggle button (I don't know the official name) 
or check box in the panel with the schedule controls (up, down, and delete) 
that when checked, updates are reflected in the database, and when un-checked, 
updates are only performed in the schedule?

I guess I've just worked with EasyWorship a lot, and when editing songs in the 
schedule, it only saves to the schedule... This allows a worship leader to sing 
only the bridge of a song one week, but not have to re-add the song to the 
database next time he/she wanted to do the whole song. 

Original comment by grga...@gmail.com on 6 Dec 2014 at 12:20

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think there are 2 usecases for editing a song in the schedule:

a) If a misspelling is detected, the easiest way is to edit the song directly 
in the schedule. Or some verses of the song are missing etc. These changes 
should be done persistant and done in the databas

b) Temporarily changes to adopt a verse etc. just for one service. Changes 
should be done only in the scheduled item and not permanent to the database.

What if we add a message which pops up after the song was edited in the 
schedule which asks "do you want to save the changes to the song database or 
only in the schedule item" 
This would meet both use cases, i guess.

Original comment by MisterSi...@gmail.com on 12 Dec 2014 at 12:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry, just seen this!

"What if we add a message which pops up after the song was edited in the 
schedule which asks "do you want to save the changes to the song database or 
only in the schedule item" 
This would meet both use cases, i guess."

It would, but I'm reluctant to take this approach since it adds an extra 
annoying dialog every time you perform a common action.

Original comment by berry...@gmail.com on 25 Feb 2015 at 10:58

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Ya, I agree…. I’m not sure what is the best way….

Original comment by grga...@gmail.com on 25 Feb 2015 at 11:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by berry...@gmail.com on 26 Feb 2015 at 12:59

• Added labels: Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect