Effective Date offset when Run Interval = Skip N Days

[BobS]

In Settings > Schedules > Run Interval, the Effective Date does not work as expected when the run interval is set to Skip N Days.  The Effective Date should be the first day the schedule runs.  Instead, the first run occurs N+1 days after the Effective Date.

[bluespray_admin]

That is by design.  The effective date can be thought as day 0, not day 1.

[BobS]

I'm sorry, but that's contrary to the normal dictionary definition of "effective", and it's not what a user expects.  "Effective" means doing something, not starting a clock to do something in N+1 days. 

Why make it so difficult and confusing for the user to specify the date the first watering occurs?  This is a simple user interface oversight that should be trivial to correct, so why stubbornly defend a non-intuitive design error as "by design"?

[BobS]

I was not questioning the logic of counting from 0 instead of 1.

I was requesting that you redefine the Effective Date to be the first watering date of a repeating schedule, regardless of the repetition pattern.  Users who want to create or edit a schedule know the date they want the watering to begin.

If you change the Effective Date per my suggestion, it enables a simple work-around for my other concern regarding the inability to program a Once Only schedule.  A Once Only schedule could be approximated by creating a repeating schedule whose Effective Date is the desired date and whose repetition interval is so large (9999 days) that the 2nd repetition never will happen.

[WarnerdauLa]

I have located the error. It occurs in a switch-case statement. See attached document. As mentioned it does not come, when run in simulator.