writing report specifications: field name=? (was: Re: Field definition)

[Francis J. Lacoste]

Hi Cédric!

On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 12:10:13PM -0500, Francis J. Lacoste wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 04:56:14PM +0100, gross, cedric wrote:
> > > Perhaps this should be considered a bug and we should allows 
> > > timegroup at other places than the top-level operation.
> > 
> > From my administrator's point of view, is better to monitoring an user
> > activity with all dates for this user than checking all date to see if a
> > given user have done something.
> > 
> > If you are able to change that, it will be absolutely fantastic.
> 
> Indeed, it is a very valid perspective. I'll put this on our TODO list.
> We'll keep you informed of progress.
> 

It is now implemented. Timegroup, rangegroup and timeslot elements can
now be nested in group or other elements. This was commited in the CVS
today. 

I've also added a bytes-by-period-by-user FTP report like you asked.

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis at Contre.COM
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.logreport.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20020316/05026fea/attachment.bin