The idea here is to unify the code that we use for dealing with Classifications, Products, and Components. It would also theoretically allow us (or local admins) to more easily add further and further levels of classification of bugs. For example, subcomponents would be possible. Here's a basic proposal for how the architecture would work. Bugzilla::Classification - The parent class Bugzilla::Classification::Product and Bugzilla::Classification::Component, subclasses that implement the stuff that's specific to products and components.
As far as the DB structure, let's just keep that the same, for now, I think. Maybe eventually we can have a "parent" classification table, and then two "subclass" tables of product and component that hold the fields specific to those "types" of classifications.
OK, I'm working on this. The class is called Bugzilla::BugContainer. It will have three subclasses, Bugzilla::BugContainer::Classification, Bugzilla::BugContainer::Product, and Bugzilla::BugContainer::Component. It's very cool, so far. It requires very little code being written by the subclasses. (Note to self: current code is in mkanat3)
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Assignee: general → mkanat
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Priority: -- → P3
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.24
Is this closely enough related to bug 43940 to be considered a duplicate?
(In reply to comment #3) > Is this closely enough related to bug 43940 to be considered a duplicate? Well, I think that's about adding a new visible feature, and this is about re-working the underlying architecture of Bugzilla. So I'd say that although one might make the other easier, they aren't duplicates.
Created attachment 253415 [details] Very old BugContainer.pm Soon after I filed this bug, I did some work on it. Attached is how far I got. It doesn't even really compile (it has a few silly errors in it), but it should give you an idea of what I was planning.
I'm very interested in how this is going. Is this more about reorganising the schema and back-end or is it about providing a facility for admins to easily customise the way products/components(/sub-components) are classified?
(In reply to comment #6) > I'm very interested in how this is going. > > Is this more about reorganising the schema and back-end or is it about > providing a facility for admins to easily customise the way > products/components(/sub-components) are classified? This bug is about the backend.
This seems like an interesting bug that might warrant new legs.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.