[Users] Bug? in V3.8.1

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:56:16 +0100
Andrej Kacian <andrej at kacian.sk> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:43:01 +0000
> Abrolag <abrolag at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 11:52:41 +0000
> > Abrolag <abrolag at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > When setting up a processing rule I tired to set age greater than
> > > 1500 (approx 4 years) but when trying to add it this changed to
> > > 1000.
> > > 
> > > However, I can change the completed entry to what I want and
> > > replace it.
> > 
> > Nobody had this?
> > 
> > Nobody interested?
> > 
> 
> It is only a limitation of that particular UI spinner widget. I have
> increased it now, next release will have it at 10000 days. Hopefully
> that will be enough. :)

Is there a valid reason to limit it?
In a few days I likely become 48 years old, I'm a musician so
10000/365=27years, 27 years + 48 years = 75 years, this likely is
more than enough for my expected lifespan.
Anyway, some people are under 18 years old and they are living straight
edge, even while they are musicians too, they likely have a much longer
lifespan. Assumed some of those kids should use Claws too and one day
they want to search a few things that were between 30 years and 2
years in the past ...?
I'm not kidding. My generation skims through photo albums and then we
try to find old friends by the Internet. The young generation likely
will search their mails, when they are old and perhaps (perhaps not)
they have a clue about the decades of emails they should search.
You know, the Bible and other books wrote about historic events
hundreds of years after they happened, that's why human kind lost much
real historical information. We reached another level and even while
the assumption that nobody will use our kind of computers and maybe
also not Claws any more in a few decades, I don't understand why
limiting such a value is ok. Limit it to the expected time when the
sun will "burn out" ;)!

2 cents