From gerv at mozilla.org Tue Dec 3 12:17:29 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 12:17:29 +0000 Subject: Email privacy In-Reply-To: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org> References: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org> Message-ID: On 28/11/13 13:29, Gervase Markham wrote: > I have a need for a Bugzilla which implements email privacy, and I'd > like to write an upstreamable patch to do it. Can people please review > my design? Does no-one have any input on this? It would be a great shame if I were to do this work and it were then considered unsuitable for upstream due to some objection which could have been dealt with if it were raised at this stage. Does anyone object to the principle of the idea of separating Bugzilla's notion of email address from the notion of the identifier you use to log in? Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From wurblzap at gmail.com Tue Dec 3 12:41:23 2013 From: wurblzap at gmail.com (Marc Schumann) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 13:41:23 +0100 Subject: Email privacy In-Reply-To: References: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org> Message-ID: I think email address and login identifier should be two different things, i. e. two different database table fields. That said, it'd probably make much sense for many installations to keep these two fields identical at all times (think current Bugzilla login, or OpenID login); this should probably even be the default behaviour. Marc 2013/12/3 Gervase Markham > On 28/11/13 13:29, Gervase Markham wrote: > Does anyone object to the principle of the idea of separating Bugzilla's > notion of email address from the notion of the identifier you use to log > in? > _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From lpsolit at gmail.com Tue Dec 3 17:04:37 2013 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 18:04:37 +0100 Subject: Email privacy In-Reply-To: References: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org> Message-ID: <529E0F25.8070306@gmail.com> Le 03. 12. 13 13:17, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > Does no-one have any input on this? Input is already in bug 218917, AFAICT, and you probably have a better audience there with 43 users in the CC list + 39 voters. Your proposal seems to be the same as what Marc already suggested in the bug, or at least is very close to his proposal. I'm not sure why you want to remove "emailsuffix" as you force everyone to type their full email address on user account creation, even for installations which all use the same domain name for their accounts. Besides this point, I'm fine with the proposal. LpSolit From gerv at mozilla.org Fri Dec 6 06:39:45 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 07:39:45 +0100 Subject: Email privacy In-Reply-To: References: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Message-ID: On 03/12/13 18:04, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > Le 03. 12. 13 13:17, Gervase Markham a ?crit : >> Does no-one have any input on this? > > Input is already in bug 218917, AFAICT, and you probably have a better > audience there with 43 users in the CC list + 39 voters. Your proposal > seems to be the same as what Marc already suggested in the bug, or at > least is very close to his proposal. OK. I'll repost there. > I'm not sure why you want to remove "emailsuffix" as you force everyone > to type their full email address on user account creation, even for > installations which all use the same domain name for their accounts. I think everyone's very used to this when signing up for or logging in to sites. And keeping it seems to me to lead to increased complexity both in the implementation and in the UI. Where and when does emailsuffix get applied? If emails and logins are linked, which of them in the database has the emailsuffix included? If one and not the other, they cannot be assumed to be the same even when they are the same. And so on. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From gerv at mozilla.org Tue Dec 10 13:10:50 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 05:10:50 -0800 Subject: Bug to switch to OR groups Message-ID: I just spent 20 minutes searching Bugzilla, this group and my email and can't find a reference to the bug about switching Bugzilla's groups from AND to OR. Can anyone help me find it? Thanks, Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From kar at cray.com Tue Dec 10 13:30:18 2013 From: kar at cray.com (Kent Rogers) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:30:18 -0600 Subject: Bug to switch to OR groups In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20131210133018.GA27354@cray.com> I think you are looking for bug 452525. -Kent On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:10:50AM -0800, Gervase Markham wrote: > I just spent 20 minutes searching Bugzilla, this group and my email and > can't find a reference to the bug about switching Bugzilla's groups from > AND to OR. Can anyone help me find it? > > Thanks, > > Gerv > _______________________________________________ > dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list > dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla > - > To view or change your list settings, click here: > From gerv at mozilla.org Tue Dec 10 18:22:02 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:22:02 -0800 Subject: Bug to switch to OR groups In-Reply-To: <20131210133018.GA27354@cray.com> References: <20131210133018.GA27354@cray.com> Message-ID: <52A75BCA.20408@mozilla.org> On 10/12/13 05:30, Kent Rogers wrote: > I think you are looking for bug 452525. That's it - thank you :-) Gerv From mcote at mozilla.com Tue Dec 10 21:16:10 2013 From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 16:16:10 -0500 Subject: Update on moving Bugzilla to git Message-ID: Just wanted to give a brief update on the plan to transition to git to assure all that it is still progressing. I've fleshed out the wiki page[1], including a step-by-step plan. I've got a one-time migration script working based on [2] that preserves the bug ID commit metadata, although I need to tweak it slightly to only annotate commits that don't reference the bug mentioned in the metadata (the original script does this, but I need to change it to Bugzilla's standard). An example of the resulting migration for bmo/4.2 is at [3]. Finally, I have a git-to-bzr.pl script working based on the previous migration script, bzr-to-cvs.pl[4]. I will be posting it for review very soon. Mark [1]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:Migrating_to_git [2]: http://www.fusonic.net/en/blog/2013/03/26/migrating-from-bazaar-to-git/ [3]: https://github.com/markrcote/bmo [4]: http://bzr.mozilla.org/bzr-plugins/bzr-to-cvs/view/head:/bzr-to-cvs.pl _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From wurblzap at gmail.com Fri Dec 6 06:49:38 2013 From: wurblzap at gmail.com (Marc Schumann) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 07:49:38 +0100 Subject: Email privacy In-Reply-To: References: <4NmdnVZoUojL2ArPnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Message-ID: emailsuffix could be a GUI-only thing imo. Meaning, addresses get translated in and out, but handled as full addresses internally. This might reconcile positions. No idea whether or how much this affects the current state of affairs in Bugzilla code, though. 2013/12/6 Gervase Markham > > I'm not sure why you want to remove "emailsuffix" as you force everyone > > to type their full email address on user account creation, even for > > installations which all use the same domain name for their accounts. > > I think everyone's very used to this when signing up for or logging in > to sites. And keeping it seems to me to lead to increased complexity > both in the implementation and in the UI. Where and when does > emailsuffix get applied? If emails and logins are linked, which of them > in the database has the emailsuffix included? If one and not the other, > they cannot be assumed to be the same even when they are the same. And > so on. > _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From justdave at bugzilla.org Thu Dec 12 07:25:22 2013 From: justdave at bugzilla.org (Dave Miller) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 02:25:22 -0500 Subject: Update on moving Bugzilla to git In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7e2dd5ce-5cec-4ddf-a6d4-101a0248f84e@email.android.com> Cool, thanks again for your work on this! "Mark C?t?" wrote: >Just wanted to give a brief update on the plan to transition to git to >assure all that it is still progressing. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. From gerv at mozilla.org Thu Dec 12 23:02:40 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:02:40 -0800 Subject: Gender-neutral pronouns Message-ID: Recently, a bug was filed to change Bugzilla to use gender-neutral pronouns: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=947823 As the docs are in flux, I asked that fixes to them be excluded, and I then reviewed the remaining patch for technical accuracy. It seems fine. But this is in some sense a policy change as well (or at least the creation of a new policy) and so I thought it should be mentioned here for discussion. (It seems that the issue of gender-neutral pronouns in software and its documentation has recently become a contentious one[0].) Gerv [0] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Libuv_gendered_pronouns_patch_dispute https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015 _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From lpsolit at gmail.com Thu Dec 12 23:16:50 2013 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:16:50 +0100 Subject: Gender-neutral pronouns In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52AA43E2.5030207@gmail.com> Le 13. 12. 13 00:02, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > But this is in some sense a policy change as well (or at least the > creation of a new policy) and so I thought it should be mentioned here > for discussion. It seems a bit weird to first review and approve the patch, and then ask for discussion. It should rather be the opposite: first have the discussion, and then review/approve the patch based on the result of this discussion. Once the patch is committed, it's a bit late to discuss. LpSolit From gerv at mozilla.org Thu Dec 12 23:25:01 2013 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:25:01 -0800 Subject: Gender-neutral pronouns In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <52AA45CD.3010602@mozilla.org> On 12/12/13 15:16, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > It seems a bit weird to first review and approve the patch, and then ask > for discussion. It should rather be the opposite: first have the > discussion, and then review/approve the patch based on the result of > this discussion. Once the patch is committed, it's a bit late to discuss. Let's not get side-tracked on process; but I confess I did not expect Simon to a+ the patch within 2 minutes of me requesting approval! I was busy drafting this email when he did it. In hindsight, I should have waited. For the sake of doing things in the right order, I've removed the a+ flag. Now, let's discuss the substance :-) Gerv From sgreen at redhat.com Thu Dec 12 23:32:19 2013 From: sgreen at redhat.com (Simon Green) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:32:19 +1000 Subject: Gender-neutral pronouns In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52AA4783.40901@redhat.com> On 13/12/13 09:02, Gervase Markham wrote: > As the docs are in flux, I asked that fixes to them be excluded, and I > then reviewed the remaining patch for technical accuracy. It seems fine. > But this is in some sense a policy change as well (or at least the > creation of a new policy) and so I thought it should be mentioned here > for discussion. I'm in support of having gender neutral language (and why I a+ the patch). -- Regards, Simon Green Software Engineer Red Hat Asia Pacific Pty Ltd From daniel.alonso at ti.com Thu Dec 19 17:41:15 2013 From: daniel.alonso at ti.com (Alonso, Daniel) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:41:15 +0000 Subject: Advanced Search Flags Message-ID: <1153E21B6E98C9449E8E40BF10090C01B372B1@DFLE11.ent.ti.com> Hi All, Recently I add a flag 'DR' to my flags list, but it wasn't included to the 'Advanced Search' Form so I added thru code. But I found an issue with the functionality: Everything goes good when search is based on just ONE flag. BUT if 'CR' and 'DR' Flags are combined to search, the result is always ZERO. I thought with this part of code on 'Search.pm' solved this, but it didn't work: if (grep(/map_flags_uc/, @$fieldsref)) { push(@supptables_special, "LEFT JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT flags.bug_id AS bug_id, GROUP_CONCAT(CONCAT(flagtypes.name, flags.status) SEPARATOR ', ') AS flags " . "FROM flags LEFT JOIN flagtypes ON flags.type_id = flagtypes.id " . "WHERE flagtypes.name = 'UC' GROUP BY bug_id) " . "AS map_flags_uc ON (bugs.bug_id = map_flags_uc.bug_id)"); } Thanks in advance. Regards! Daniel Luevano Alonso | Tool Support Engineer * | (214) 5673309 *Daniel.alonso at ti.com [TI2] P Don't print this email unless you really need to, The environment is everyone's responsibility P _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From daniel.alonso at ti.com Fri Dec 20 21:22:44 2013 From: daniel.alonso at ti.com (Alonso, Daniel) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 21:22:44 +0000 Subject: Advanced Search Flags In-Reply-To: <1153E21B6E98C9449E8E40BF10090C01B372B1@DFLE11.ent.ti.com> References: <1153E21B6E98C9449E8E40BF10090C01B372B1@DFLE11.ent.ti.com> Message-ID: <1153E21B6E98C9449E8E40BF10090C01B37515@DFLE11.ent.ti.com> Actually I want to use the Boolean chart for advanced search, If you have any documentation on how to implement it or change it on the code it would be great! Thanks in advance. Daniel Luevano Alonso | Tool Support Engineer Phone |? 214 5673309 Daniel.alonso at ti.com -----Original Message----- From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org [mailto:developers-owner at bugzilla.org] On Behalf Of Alonso, Daniel Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:41 AM To: dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org Subject: Advanced Search Flags Hi All, Recently I add a flag 'DR' to my flags list, but it wasn't included to the 'Advanced Search' Form so I added thru code. But I found an issue with the functionality: Everything goes good when search is based on just ONE flag. BUT if 'CR' and 'DR' Flags are combined to search, the result is always ZERO. I thought with this part of code on 'Search.pm' solved this, but it didn't work: if (grep(/map_flags_uc/, @$fieldsref)) { push(@supptables_special, "LEFT JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT flags.bug_id AS bug_id, GROUP_CONCAT(CONCAT(flagtypes.name, flags.status) SEPARATOR ', ') AS flags " . "FROM flags LEFT JOIN flagtypes ON flags.type_id = flagtypes.id " . "WHERE flagtypes.name = 'UC' GROUP BY bug_id) " . "AS map_flags_uc ON (bugs.bug_id = map_flags_uc.bug_id)"); } Thanks in advance. Regards! Daniel Luevano Alonso | Tool Support Engineer * | (214) 5673309 *Daniel.alonso at ti.com [TI2] P Don't print this email unless you really need to, The environment is everyone's responsibility P _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla - To view or change your list settings, click here: