enter_bug page

Bradley Baetz bbaetz at student.usyd.edu.au
Thu Oct 17 14:00:21 UTC 2002

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, David Miller wrote:

> On 10/17/02 2:25 PM +0100, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > We should be aiming to have the most-used features accessible
> > easily, and lesser-used features can require more clicks.
> Which is exactly the reason I completely disagree with Gerv, both for
> attachments and dependencies, because those are both VERY frequently used.
> I get at least new bug notification every two or three days where someone
> files a bug and immediately attaches a patch to it.  That's two bugmails
> when I could have just gotten one.  We frequently have a need for metabugs
> (though it's probably overused, it's a fact of life) and dependencies on
> the enter_bug page makes that a lot easier, too.

Attachments have a lot of extra issues, though, and would be a massive
ammount of work. You'd need to move at least some of attachment.cgi into a
.pm to share with post_bug (for validation), plus the UI probably won't 
look the best, either. A lot of stuff relies on having a bug_id already, 
although since we wouldn't have to check for obsolete attachments, or 
canedit perms, that may be avoidable.

You'd also have to clean up processmail :)


More information about the developers mailing list