Custom fields

[Gervase Markham]

Joel Peshkin wrote:

> 1) Sites will frequently need to add some special field to make THEIR
> customer happy.  It is likely that they will need to do this and then
> tweak templates to make this vary on a per-product basis.  Just because
> any site specific thing that is needed by contributors with sufficient
> clout DOES become a standard field should not imply that the others 
> are irrelevent.

No-one would argue that our current set of fields is a particularly 
sensible default set for a bug tracking system (URL, for example). But 
that doesn't mean we should implement customfields as a way of avoiding 
hard decisions about what the available set should be.

> 2) About once a week, I see an RFE response that says.... "This should
> not be a feature, you should wait for customfields and do it that way"
>    Do we plan to dust off all of those and re-evaluate that position?
> Won't the resulting heap of fields really clutter Bugzilla?

One reasonable answer would be: "We don't support doing this." As I said 
earlier, this is a valid response to some feature requests.

Another point is that there are a number of things we could do as an 
alternative to custom fields, which would help with these people's 
problems. Things like bug cloning, making the version field a 
multi-select, and so on.

Gerv