"Peter Koželj" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 10/17/12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 17/10/12 17:15, Joe Dreimann wrote: >> >> On 17 Oct 2012, at 17:00, Peter Koželj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Gary Martin >> >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On 17/10/12 12:03, Ryan Ollos wrote: >> >>>> It gets interesting where really you want to raise a bug against >> >>>> multiple >> >>>> versions but it is not the end of the world. The main thing is >that >> >>>> there >> >>>> is a prompt for a primary version to raise against - further >versions >> >>>> would >> >>>> probably be expected to be noted in the description and those >dealing >> >>>> with >> >>>> the ticket could then determine whether further tickets are >needed. >> >>> I was just thinking about the multiple versions per ticket (bug) >> >>> support. >> >>> This needs to be formal and not just a in-comment or >in-description >> text. >> >>> I >> >>> have some ideas how we could go about this but it is off topic >for this >> >>> ticket. I'll start a separate discussion on the subject at some >point >> in >> >>> the fure (opening multiple unrelated tickets should be good >enough at >> >>> the >> >>> moment). >> >> The most obvious answer or me would be to allow to select multiple >> >> versions in the field, similar to how Multiple Select works in the >> Chosen >> >> plugin: >> >> http://harvesthq.github.com/chosen/ >> >> >> >> - Joe >> >> >> >> >> > >> [...] >> > >> > In my case, I am not so much concerned with how it looks as much as >how >> > it would be supported by the model. Depending on the way things >> > currently work, we might want to use a fresh field rather than >subvert >> > the use of the current version field. >> > >> >> Two suggestions ... >> >> 1. custom fields >> 2. keywords ... or something similar ;) >> >> -- >> Regards, >> >> Olemis. >> >> Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ >> Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ >> >> Featured article: >> > >Ticket needs to be resolved for each individual version separately. So >we >would need at least status per version. >And when the solutions for different versions must be different, one >would >also appreciate separate descriptions, comments... (but I am not sure >this >is common enough that it would warent special support). > >We could stick to ticket per version (as what you have to do now) but >link >the tickets together with special relation type (when we have ticket >relations going). Basically what Gary is suggesting with subtickets but >build on top of the ticket relation concept (parent/child, duplicate, >version subticket,...) that we need to establish first. > >From the UI perspective, we could still allow for bulk create of these >tickets by selecting multiple versions in the version field and provide >the >user with ability of on overview of all the linked tickets. Again, also >built on top of ticket relations. > >Personally I am still not decided whether I would rather see multiple >versions per ticket or version specific subtickets. But I do need the >ability to resolve them separately. > >Peter For me it would have to be a user choice as to whether a multi version ticket should be split or treated as a single entity. In the latter case I would be happy with a single resolution. Cheers, Gary
