This mail is an automated notification from the task tracker
of the project: Savane.
/**************************************************************************/
[task #777] Latest Modifications:
Changes by:
Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
'Date:
mer 22.09.2004 � 11:10 (Europe/Paris)
------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ----------------------------
Hello,
Can you tell us how many groups are really using this status wrong values at GNU
Savannah? At CERN, only one groups is in this case, so we won't write a script just
for one group, it is faster to do the job at hand.
/**************************************************************************/
[task #777] Full Item Snapshot:
URL: <http://gna.org/task/?func=detailitem&item_id=777>
Project: Savane
Submitted by: Mathieu Roy
On: mer 22.09.2004 � 10:37
Should Start On: mer 22.09.2004 � 00:00
Should be Finished on: jeu 23.09.2004 � 00:00
Category: Packaging
Priority: 5 - Immediate
Resolution: None
Privacy: Public
Assigned to: yeupou
Percent Complete: 0%
Status: Open
Effort: 0.00
Planned Release:
Summary: update script forbidden unplanned use of Status field
Original Submission: Last year, it was decided that the Status field would only be a
boolean for Open/Closed.
Now, we realized that old installation that migrates from pre-Savane havent got the
Status field values different from Open/Closed removed. This is true for LCG Savannah
and GNU Savannah.
Usage of field values different from Open/Closed does not make the trackers unusable
by break the logic of many things.
A script must be written to make this change smoothly for users.
What remained to be determined is:
- whether we map usage of Status to Resolution
- whether we do not map resolution and just update
the field status in the way it makes sense
- whether we copy Status into a custom field
In all case, we'll have to 'update the field status in the way it makes sense'.
We need some user input from CERN to make a decision. We'd like to hear also some info
about the case at Savannah -- are they many groups using the field Status in this way?
What's the way to go in your opinion?
Anyway, a decision will have to made today -- but in the worse case, it will still
possible to modify the script we will provide.
This script will be included in update/1.0.4 but wont have any effect on installation
made since Savane is release -- more precisely, since the 2003 CERN branch. For
instance, Gna! is unaffected by this problem.
Regards,
Commentaires
------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: mer 22.09.2004 � 11:10 By: Mathieu Roy <yeupou>
Hello,
Can you tell us how many groups are really using this status wrong values at GNU
Savannah? At CERN, only one groups is in this case, so we won't write a script just
for one group, it is faster to do the job at hand.
CC List
-------
CC Address | Comment
------------------------------------+-----------------------------
ype |
beuc |
beu |
For detailed info, follow this link:
<http://gna.org/task/?func=detailitem&item_id=777>
_______________________________________________
Message post� via/par Gna!
http://gna.org/
_______________________________________________
Savane-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/savane-dev
