The Road to 2.18
stu at asyn.com
Mon Mar 8 01:54:22 UTC 2004
Gervase Markham wrote:
> Stuart Donaldson wrote:
>> It would be a big win from the users perspective to get even a
>> partial solution towards custom fields get into the system for the
>> next release. This would lock-down a supported schema with a
>> migration path in case the approach were to change. All these caveats
>> about applying the custom fields patches because there is "no
>> guarantee that this will be the way we do it" are holding some people
>> back from trying it out.
> Indeed. And that's something we want to maintain. Locking down the
> schema is to be avoided - because we want to be able to say "actually,
> this is all wrong, we want to do it differently."
I must respectfully disagree.
The custom fields issue has been around for several years with only a
handful of people able to put any time into working it because of the
maintenance risks, and the chance of it going in a conflicting
direction. Continuing to wait for the perfect solution will result in
the same issues and frustrations several years from now.
What is needed, is a path to be chosen, and for Bugzilla to take at
least a couple of steps down that path.
It should be possible to choose a minimal feature set that will take
will address 75% of the requirements for custom fields. Then make the
committment to maintain an upward migration path for that approach.
The schema is never "locked down" only the requirement that a migration
from an old schema be provided.
I believe many bugzilla users would really like to see some progress
here. I also believe that if some support for custom fields can make it
into the main release, that contributions and participation on filling
out the functionality will accelerate as the barrier for participation
More information about the developers