corporate win--their requirements
myk at mozilla.org
Sat Sep 28 02:32:15 UTC 2002
Gervase Markham wrote:
> What sort of timeframe is Zippy looking at to get all these
> enhancements made?
The schedule isn't in place yet, but current thinking is to finish
development and get everyone using the system by May/June of next year,
with periodic deployments before then to groups willing to use a moving
>> Product and User Views
> Does this require some sort of explicit support, or can this be done
> by Zippy replacing e.g. search.html.tmpl with a custom "distributor"
> template which analyses the requirements for that CGI/user/product and
> then PROCESSes the appropriate custom template?
There's two issues here: how to do it and whether to make it custom or
check it in. As to the first, a distributor template might work,
although we have to come up with a better way to define views than the
filename hacks we're doing for formats since views are multi-dimensional
(in other words, we don't want to have
search-qa-Browser.html.tmpl, etc.). Maybe TT's "views" feature can help
As to the second issue, I don't see why this should be custom to their
installation. Wanting to customize the interface by product and major
user type seems like a feature a lot of installations would find useful.
"show bug" is overcrowded as it is, and new fields keep pouring in;
chopping it up into targeted pages (with an option to see everything if
you want) is something I think b.m.o would also be interested in.
> I was struggling with this problem the other day for custom graphing.
> Is there any way of getting JS to update form fields with values
> fetched from a server, in a way that even works in Netscape 4?
It's hard to the point of not being worth it.
>> Custom Resolutions
> Sidenote: I think we should be making the Product the configuration
> barrier for a lot of things. Combined with the third level of
> categorisation, we can start to make a lot of settings product-specific.
The request tracker's implementation, with inclusions and exclusions
lists, is a good start.
>> Reopened Count
> This seems like a fairly simple RFE. Would it only have to appear when
> the bug was in the REOPENED state, or would it also appear in the
> ASSIGNED state?
To be really useful I think the latter.
>> Pull-down Menu of Assignees
> This is a FRFE. We should do it by using a template to define the UI
> for user selection wherever it occurs, and making that template do all
> the work.
What's an FRFE?
> Would the list be a global list of Bugzilla users, or restricted in
> some way?
The latter. Probably it would be a list specific to a product and maybe
>> Project Management Fields
> Can you be more specific about exactly which fields are required?
> There's a patch for this, I know. Can we implement this in terms of
> custom fields, or does there need to be an interdependence between
> these fields?
I'm not sure what the logic of these fields needs to be, but I suspect
it'll be more than custom fields can handle. I'll try to find out more
>> System Configuration Fields
> Can we not support this request using enter_bug.cgi comment-formatting
> templates? Or do they want to query efficiently for all bugs filed by
> anyone using a Pentium IV processor?
More information about the developers