Jesse J. Clark
jjclark1982 at gmail.com
Fri Feb 5 18:02:25 UTC 2010
On Feb 5, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Guy Pyrzak wrote:
> Sorry to be a buzz kill, but maybe this discussion should be happening on the bug?
Bug 251556 is one piece of the puzzle, but it's nice to have this discussion of how to move forward with bug link fields. Here is how I imagine we could progress toward Gerv's design:
- Relationship trees. Bug 539131
- Reverse Editability. This gets into a lot of permissions issues, some of which we have worked out in PRACA.
- Multiplicability. Should be similar to FIELD_TYPE_MULTI_SELECT.
- Migration of non-custom link fields
- Combined relationship editing widget
This still doesn't address Max's plans for fully-mutual relationships between separate bug trackers.
More information about the developers