bugzilla.mozilla.org has resumed normal operation. Attachments prior to 2014 will be unavailable for a few days. This is tracked in Bug 1475801.
Please report any other irregularities here.

[MERGE] per bug queries are to be removed and simple page created for a users to see their old tags

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

()

bugzilla.mozilla.org
General
RESOLVED FIXED
3 years ago
3 years ago

People

(Reporter: dkl, Assigned: dkl)

Tracking

Development

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Assignee)

Description

3 years ago
SSIA
(Assignee)

Comment 1

3 years ago
Actually thinking about his before moving forward, I need to clarify that this may in fact going against what we planned. During my merge work, I got over greedy and removed too much I think.

Glob, you mentioned that you would like for personal tags to be removed from the merge with upstream trunk. Along they way per bug queries (what you see in the footer) transitioned into what is now Personal Tags (what is the in bug attributes) in upstream trunk. Do we want to keep the per bug queries in the footer like we have now and just not do the full transition to Personal Tags? Or did you mean when you said that we want to get rid of all it altogether? 

Gathering a little data to back up our decision, it doesn't seem like the per bug queries we have in the footer are heavily used and may not be missed: 150 distinct owners with 385 tags spread across 6877 bugs.

dkl
Flags: needinfo?(glob)
(In reply to David Lawrence [:dkl] from comment #1)
> Glob, you mentioned that you would like for personal tags to be removed from
> the merge with upstream trunk. Along they way per bug queries (what you see
> in the footer) transitioned into what is now Personal Tags (what is the in
> bug attributes) in upstream trunk. Do we want to keep the per bug queries in
> the footer like we have now and just not do the full transition to Personal
> Tags? Or did you mean when you said that we want to get rid of all it
> altogether?

remove bug tagging completely; it's a high complexity feature with minimal uptake on bmo that has solid work-arounds (eg. browser bookmarks with tags).

in order to ease migration for those currently using it, we should keep the data in the database (in its current form) with a simple page that lists your saved tags with a link to show the bug list.  it shouldn't be possible to add/edit those tags anymore, and we should remove that page and the db entries after a decent grace period.

the page should have simple help which describes alternatives, and we'd probably need an option to open each bug in its own tab (so they can be individually bookmarked/browser-tagged).
Flags: needinfo?(glob)
(Assignee)

Updated

3 years ago
Summary: [MERGE] per bug queries was lost in the merge and needs to be added back → [MERGE] per bug queries are to be removed and simple page created for a users to see their old tags
(Assignee)

Comment 3

3 years ago
Created attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
1227316_1.patch

Add new table to Saved Searches tab under userprefs.cgi that lists the current old bug tags for the user. They can run the query or remove the tag if desired. There will be no way to add *new* tags as they are obsolete.
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review?(dylan)
Comment on attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
1227316_1.patch

Review of attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

r- this seems to have bitrotted? My fault, I'm sorry. :(
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review?(dylan)
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review-
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: feedback+
(Assignee)

Comment 5

3 years ago
Comment on attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
1227316_1.patch

(In reply to Dylan William Hardison [:dylan] from comment #4)
> Comment on attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
> 1227316_1.patch
> 
> Review of attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> r- this seems to have bitrotted? My fault, I'm sorry. :(

I have merged the upstream-merge branch to both current origin/master and upstream/master. Make sure you are checking out that branch when doing your review.

dkl
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review- → review?(dylan)
Comment on attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
1227316_1.patch

Review of attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I somehow missed that the review was against the "upstream-merge" branch, woops :-)

It looks good but test 10 fails:

t/010dependencies.t .. 1/? 
#   Failed test 'Dependency on Bugzilla::Sentry from Bugzilla::Error causes loop. --ERROR'
#   at t/010dependencies.t line 93.

#   Failed test 'Dependency on Bugzilla::Util from Bugzilla::Sentry causes loop. --ERROR'
#   at t/010dependencies.t line 93.

#   Failed test 'Dependency on Bugzilla::Error from Bugzilla::Util causes loop. --ERROR'
#   at t/010dependencies.t line 93.
# Looks like you failed 3 tests of 1179.
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review?(dylan) → review-
Comment on attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]
1227316_1.patch

Review of attachment 8691552 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I take that back. the patch does not cause that failure so I see no reason to not r+ as it does work.
Cheers!

r=dylan
Attachment #8691552 - Flags: review- → review+
(Assignee)

Comment 8

3 years ago
To ssh://gitolite3@git.mozilla.org/webtools/bmo/bugzilla.git
   e6280b2..b855b21  upstream-merge -> upstream-merge
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 3 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.