Automatic unfold while drag is to fast / sensitive

[buhtz]

Using JabRef-5.0-dev--snapshot--2019-02-19--master--623718aa9.jar.

When dragging (not drop!) an item into the group tree each group unfolds when it has contact with the dragged item.

This happens absolutely to fast related to other applications. There should be a delay (between 1 or 2 sec) before a group unfolds.

[tobiasdiez]

This should be fixed in the latest development version. Could you please check the build from http://builds.jabref.org/master/. Thanks! Please remember to make a backup of your library before trying-out this version.

[buhtz]

There are still problems. See my answer in the referenced issue.

[AEgit]

I can replicate most of the issues reported by @noMICROSOFTbuhtz in #4838 (comment).
See: #4838 (comment)

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!

[AEgit]

JabRef 5.3--2021-01-04--10180ed
Windows 10 10.0 amd64
Java 14.0.2

All the related issues reported in #4838 (comment) persist in the current developer version of JabRef.

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!

[buhtz]

Again I have to say it is so impolite to close an Issue 1) via a bot 2) just because it is "to old". 2) does not mean it is not important anymore.

No I fully migrated to Citavi including all disadvantages of Citavi. But it works better for my use cases.

If someone want to migrate to there is a helper script migrating JabRef bib-files incl. attachments completely to Citavi 6.*.
https://codeberg.org/buhtz/Migrate_JabRef_2_Citavi

[koppor]

@Codeberg-AsGithubAlternative-buhtz Thank you for the input. Could you also provide a script to migrate from Citavi to JabRef (which is 100% open source and a non-profit e.V.). Then users would have easily the freedom of choice 🤩

[buhtz]

Could you also provide a script to migrate from Citavi to JabRef

Point for you. The JabRef_2_Citavi script can be a good base for such a project. If anyone needs it I will support it.
https://codeberg.org/buhtz/Migrate_Citavi_2_JabRef