Unable to add contacts. Contact window appears, add all data, hit OK. Contact fails to show up in address book. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Nothing special, just attempt to add contact in the usual way. 2. 3. Actual Results: There are no error messages of any kind that I'm aware of, however if there is a log file or a way to turn on logging, I'd be happy to do so. I would be happy to share my desktop with a developer, provide ssh access, whatever is needed to resolve this issue.
Could you send a screenshot of your kaddressbook please ?
Thank you for responding so quickly. Your request forced me to take another, closer look. It turns out that the address book checkbox was not ticked. This is something easy to miss as I spent both considerable time and frustration over this. May I suggest a minor change be made to save others the time and aggravation I spent? Simply make the default to "pre-tick" any/all address books. Figuring out how to "turn it off" is both easier and less critical than figuring out how to turn it on. If I can't find the contact info. I can't get my work done and I'm going to assume it's broken - clearly I did assume that. If I can't figure out how to turn it off - I can still get work done. New users are always going to want to see the information they're entering to confirm things are working. It's trivial for an experienced user to turn off an address book they don't want to see - so again, the default should be to see everything without any extra effort. Thanks for your time and consideration. On Wednesday, November 6, 2013 10:23 PM, Laurent Montel <montel@kde.org> wrote: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=327255 Laurent Montel <montel@kde.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |montel@kde.org --- Comment #1 from Laurent Montel <montel@kde.org> --- Could you send a screenshot of your kaddressbook please ?
So in summary each new addressbook is disable by default that's it ? and you want that we enable it ?
(In reply to comment #3) > So in summary each new addressbook is disable by default that's it ? > and you want that we enable it ? I'm not the original reporter, but that's exactly what I think should be done. Please note that also the default addressbook (created by Akonadi FirstRun) has to be enabled before being able to store any contact, which can be _very_ confusing for a new user IMHO. And the same also applies to the calendars (in KOrganizer), it's not restricted to the addressbooks.
I agree with Wolfgang. Experienced users can easily disable things they don't want. New users have no idea what's wrong and generally assume it's broken - someone like me with some Linux experience and/or programming experience may go so far as to report it as a bug. A transplant from the Windoze universe will assume it's broken and simply move on - either to an alternative application if available - or just return to Windoze left with a bad taste in their mouth and it's doubtful they'll return. Applications should do what the user expects - it should be ready for use right out of the box. If a user has to tweak it to use it the first time, chances are they're going to walk away from it - this goes for any and all applications. Tweaking should be left for someone that has had a chance to explore the application and get some use out of it. You don't get a second chance to make a first impression. Just my opinion. On Saturday, November 9, 2013 3:31 AM, Wolfgang Bauer <wbauer@tmo.at> wrote: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=327255 Wolfgang Bauer <wbauer@tmo.at> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wbauer@tmo.at --- Comment #4 from Wolfgang Bauer <wbauer@tmo.at> --- (In reply to comment #3) > So in summary each new addressbook is disable by default that's it ? > and you want that we enable it ? I'm not the original reporter, but that's exactly what I think should be done. Please note that also the default addressbook (created by Akonadi FirstRun) has to be enabled before being able to store any contact, which can be _very_ confusing for a new user IMHO. And the same also applies to the calendars (in KOrganizer), it's not restricted to the addressbooks.
In KDE SC 4.12.97, newly created calendars and addressbooks are still disabled in KOrganizer/KAddressbook. And in particular the default ones created when running Akonadi/those applications the first time. So you have to explicitely enable the default resources before you can actually use those applications, which really is not obvious for a new user. (and this is quite ridiculous, I would even say) Also, when adding a calendar/addressbook, you do so most of the time because you want to _use_ it I guess. Having to first enable it doesn't really make sense i believe. If they are enabled by default, users can still disable them if they want to. So, please change this. Thank you.
This bug has only been reported for versions before 4.14, which have been unsupported for at least two years now. Can anyone tell if this bug still present? If noone confirms this bug for a Framework-based version of kaddressbook (version 5.0 or later, as part of KDE Applications 15.08 or later), it gets closed in about three months.
(In reply to Denis Kurz from comment #7) > Can anyone tell if this bug still present? Apparently not. I just tried with 16.08.1, and newly created calendars/addressbooks are now enabled by default. Furthermore, you can add contacts/events also to disabled calendars/addressbooks, they are just not displayed. There's a difference between KAddressbook and KOrganizer in this regard though: KOrganizer shows a warning that the calendar is disabled/"filtered out" and that you should activate it on the left if you want to see the events, while KAddressbook does not. One "bug" I still noticed: The default calendar was still disabled in KOrganizer on a fresh user account, I had to enable it manually. In KAddressbook, the default addressbook was enabled though as I would expect it. So from my POV this can be closed. If there are still certain specific "hiccups", they can/should be filed separately anyway I think.
Thanks for the feedback.