Bug Relationships

[Vitaly Fedrushkov]

On 11.01.2010 22:30, Gervase Markham wrote:
> [I've had this idea kicking around in my head for a while, but I don't
> think I've ever written it up properly for discussion. So here it is.
> It's inspired by a feature on a proprietary bug tracking system I used
> to use. It was generally terrible, but this was good.]

> It would work like this: an admin would define a number of relationships
> there could be between bugs. (Some common ones would ship by default.) E.g.

You forgot to mention: that system is also capable to bind objects of different 
types, like:

   Bug A is-reproducible-in Version N
   Bug A is-reproducible-in Version M
   Bug A is-fixed-in Version K

   Version M suffers-from Bug A
   Version K is-immune-to Bug A

> G is a duplicate of H

> And, of course, the reciprocal language for each relationship would also
> be defined, if different:

> H is a duplicate of G

Here one should add 'commutative' check box, to search both sides in such 
relationships.

Also, relationships are different in their effects on workflow.  Example:

   B blocks A
   C documents-changes-introduced-by A

both may prevent A from being resolved, while

   D is-a-root-cause-of A

may not.

Regards,
Vitaly.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla