Implemented "Current selection" group option

[m-peeler]

Added new option to the "Group Options" in the GroupDialog to allow the creation of a group that contains the currently selected entries. If there are no entries selected, this option is disabled. If there is more than one entry selected, this option is selected by default.

Closes #11449.

Mandatory checks

• Change in CHANGELOG.md described in a way that is understandable for the average user (if applicable)
• Tests created for changes (if applicable)
• Manually tested changed features in running JabRef (always required)
• Screenshots added in PR description (for UI changes)
• Checked developer's documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I outlined it in this pull request.
• Checked documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I created an issue at https://github.com/JabRef/user-documentation/issues or, even better, I submitted a pull request to the documentation repository.

[koppor]

Added new option to the "Group Options" in the GroupDialog to allow the creation of a group that contains the currently selected entries. If there are no entries selected, this option is disabled. If there is more than one entry selected, this option is selected by default.

I think, the group dialog for adding and editing groups should be the same. The current proposal also shows "Current selection" when editing a group:

See https://docs.jabref.org/finding-sorting-and-cleaning-entries/groups#types-of-groups for the semantics of the different radio buttons.

Maybe, we do not overoptimize too much and just add the selected entries to a group if "Explicit Selection" was chosen.

I think the seldom case of unassignment can be easily done by a user.

(I thought, there was an issue regarding unassignment via drag and drop at https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/issues?q=sort%3Aupdated-desc+is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Agroups, but I did not find it)

This solution contradicts the intention of groups.

Closes #11449.

Mandatory checks

* [x]  Change in `CHANGELOG.md` described in a way that is understandable for the average user (if applicable)

* [ ]  Tests created for changes (if applicable)

* [x]  Manually tested changed features in running JabRef (always required)

* [x]  Screenshots added in PR description (for UI changes)

* [ ]  [Checked developer's documentation](https://devdocs.jabref.org/): Is the information available and up to date? If not, I outlined it in this pull request.

* [x]  [Checked documentation](https://docs.jabref.org/): Is the information available and up to date? If not, I created an issue at [JabRef/user-documentation/issues](https://github.com/JabRef/user-documentation/issues?q=sort%3Aupdated-desc+is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen) or, even better, I submitted a pull request to the documentation repository.

[koppor]

@m-peeler Please merge upstream/main, reposition CHANGELOG.md entry, and adress th review commends 😅

[koppor]

@m-peeler Please see the failing test. Longer story: We made a release inbetween. Thus, your change will go into a next release. Therefore the test "CHANGELOG.md - only unreleased touched" was red.

[m-peeler]

Yes! Was writing a comment but had to run off somewhere. I’ve just made a second pull request with this feature and a create-on-right-click one that should pass this test?

…

On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 6:57 PM Oliver Kopp ***@***.***> wrote: @m-peeler <https://github.com/m-peeler> Please see the failing test. Longer story: We made a release inbetween. Thus, your change will go into a next release. Therefore the test "CHANGELOG.md - only unreleased touched" was red. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#11455 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A2UZFFBI4KEK3WWWEPFHYA3ZLRTFRAVCNFSM6AAAAABKNNMHZKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMJYHA3TGMBRGM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[koppor]

Yes! Was writing a comment but had to run off somewhere. I’ve just made a second pull request with this feature and a create-on-right-click one

Then, I will close this PR - and we will concentrate on #11476.