208711 - Format For Printing should print out url for the bug

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Bugzilla :: Query/Bug List, enhancement, P3)

Description

[Jason Pyeron]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705)
Build Identifier: 

for a QA engineer who recives printed reports on their desk, it would help if 
he knew which bugzilla instance it came from.

Many sites leave their header as the default "This is Bugzilla"


Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:

Comment 1

[Jason Pyeron]

Attachment: a partial solution

how do I get the server and url base in templates???

Comment 2

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

[% Param("urlbase") %]

Comment 3

[Jason Pyeron]

Attachment: bugzilla-208711-v1.02.diff

Comment 4

[Vlad Dascalu]

Comment on attachment 160892 [details] [diff] [review]
bugzilla-208711-v1.02.diff

Bug needs to be replaced with a template variable since it can be customized to
"issue" or other things by Bugzilla administrators. I think it's [% terms.Bug
%], check template\en\default\global\variables.none.tmpl to be sure.

(A) The URL of a bug shouldn't be displayed when viewing a bug report, since
it's already available in the address field of the browser.

(B) The URL of a bug could be displayed when viewing multiple bugs. It's useful
to copy-paste the URL of a bug when viewing multiple ones, for example.

(C) The URL of a bug could be displayed on the "Format for printing" page,
since this would solve item0.

Since (B) and (C) use the same thing, your patches implements the correct
behaviour for all three cases.

This is ready to go in regarding my point of view if you address the previous
issue. :)

Comment 5

[Vlad Dascalu]

Comment on attachment 160892 [details] [diff] [review]
bugzilla-208711-v1.02.diff

Oh, and it makes sense to make it clickable, to be similar with the URL field
and to enable easy copy-pasting.

Comment 6

[Jason Pyeron]

Attachment: bugzilla-208711-v1.03.diff

changes made.

Comment 7

[Jason Pyeron]

re comment 5, this just purely for citation reasons

Comment 8

[Vlad Dascalu]

Comment on attachment 160904 [details] [diff] [review]
bugzilla-208711-v1.03.diff

It's not clickable (see comment 5).

Comment 9

[Vlad Dascalu]

Well, yeah, but it would still be nice to open the bugs you're interested in new
tabs. Or to copy-paste it in IRC or in an IM window. It's difficult to do either
of those if it's not clickable.

Comment 10

[Vlad Dascalu]

AFAIK, almost all URLs in Bugzilla are clickable as well.

Comment 11

[Jason Pyeron]

Attachment: bugzilla-208711-v1.04.diff

cliky too

Comment 12

[Christian Reis]

I am against this change. If the site administrator hasn't customized his
header, adding adding a visible link to the long list output seems like a
hideous hack to help an engineer identify what bugzilla that list refers to. We
don't want to make long list any wordier than it should be -- it already is
packed full with data. Most printouts of web pages include URLs in the header
anyway. 

Reopen if you can find good justification for this.

Comment 13

[Jason Pyeron]

Certain versions of acrobat do not make header/footer with url in it.
Certain version of IE, crop the url in the footer.

modifing the header to include the whole url does it for all the pages.

modifing just this page, is 'too much' for a novice admin to do.

this is just for the print bug page.

may be we should de discussing placement instead.

Comment 14

[Christian Reis]

I honestly think this has no place in mainline Bugzilla, and should be
implemented as a site-specific change; I know it's frustrating to hear this, but
it's a trivial template change that can be easily ported, and doesn't bring
enough benefit to justify adding it. If you still feel strongly about this, I'd
say ask Dave as he has the authority to pronouce a final decision here.

Comment 15

[Jason Pyeron]

If knowing template toolkit is a requirement to admin bz, then yes.
But since the docs for bz don't really get into [% Param('this or that')%] nor 
do they give a file tree to cross reference 
 'Format For Printing' -> 'show-multiple.html.tmpl'

I don't think it is reasonable to ask an admin to do this type of change.

Printouts, by their very nature, are used in contexts outside of bugzilla. 
Making it imperative to provide ALL the information to the reader, especially 
the link.

It would be analogous to a published paper not having the publisher's info and 
page numbers.

Comment 16

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

(In reply to comment #15)
> If knowing template toolkit is a requirement to admin bz, then yes.
> But since the docs for bz don't really get into [% Param('this or that')%] nor 
> do they give a file tree to cross reference 
>  'Format For Printing' -> 'show-multiple.html.tmpl'
> 
> I don't think it is reasonable to ask an admin to do this type of change.

Then the docs are lacking, and we should fix them up.  This is by all means
expected of Bugzilla admins who want to change what the site looks like.  TT is
a lot easier to learn than Perl. :)

That said, the format for printing page really needs a complete overhaul anyway,
in my opinion.  There's been a lot of data added to the "bug" over the last
couple years, and everyone always ignores the long format template when adding
stuff to the single bug template.

Comment 17

[Myk Melez [:myk] [@mykmelez]]

Comment on attachment 160906 [details] [diff] [review]
bugzilla-208711-v1.04.diff

Adding URLs is a good idea for users who work from printouts, but we shouldn't
display it in the web version of the page, just the print version.  Use a
print-specific stylesheet with a style rule like the following to get that
behavior:

      a.bug:after { content: " <" attr(href) ">"; }

(You'll also have to add class="bug" to bug link anchors.)

Comment 18

[Frédéric Buclin]

The trunk is now frozen to prepare Bugzilla 2.22. Enhancement bugs are retargetted to 2.24.

Comment 19

[Frédéric Buclin]

This bug is retargetted to Bugzilla 3.2 for one of the following reasons:

- it has no assignee (except the default one)
- we don't expect someone to fix it in the next two weeks (i.e. before we freeze the trunk to prepare Bugzilla 3.0 RC1)
- it's not a blocker

If you are working on this bug and you think you will be able to submit a patch in the next two weeks, retarget this bug to 3.0.

If this bug is something you would like to see implemented in 3.0 but you are not a developer or you don't think you will be able to fix this bug yourself in the next two weeks, please *do not* retarget this bug.

If you think this bug should absolutely be fixed before we release 3.0, either ask on IRC or use the "blocking3.0 flag".

Comment 20

[Joel Maher ( :jmaher ) (UTC -8)]

Max, can we find a mentor for this bug?

Comment 21

[Andre Klapper]

@jmaher: Max won't answer that as he unCCed from any tickets on 2013‑08‑01 (see user activity)

Comment 22

[Jason Pyeron]

Still watching this. If you need the patch updated, let me know.

Comment 23

[Firefox Bug Husbandry Bot]

Removing good-first-bug keyword because team does not have bandwidth to mentor at the moment.

Comment 24

[Jason Pyeron]

wow - this is still open?

Comment 25

[Kohei Yoshino [:kohei]]

I think we can close this as WONTFIX...

1. We don’t have link to the separate Format For Printing page anymore thanks to the (incomplete) print CSS
2. Your printer allows to show the bug URL on the page header or footer.