Closed Bug 308221 Opened 19 years ago Closed 19 years ago

Update bugzilla.dtd to comply with schema

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Bug Import/Export & Moving, defect)

2.21
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.22

People

(Reporter: gregaryh, Assigned: gregaryh)

References

Details

Attachments

(2 files, 4 obsolete files)

Add such things as flags, isprivate, and attachment encoding
Assignee: import-export → ghendricks
Attached patch v1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
I am not sure if flags need to be defined twice, once for bugs and again for
attachments, or if it can be done only once. I was unable to find any examples
where an element is defined more than in one element. To be safe I defined it
in both places.
Attachment #195789 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie)
Blocks: 307328
Attached patch test xml file (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Exported from updated show.xml.tmpl
Comment on attachment 195789 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

There is no need to define flag twice (dupe ELEMENT and ATTLIST) and there's no
definition for the filename part of attachment.
Attachment #195789 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie) → review-
Attached patch v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
fixed the problems outlined.
Attachment #195789 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #195801 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie)
Comment on attachment 195801 [details] [diff] [review]
v2

>Index: bugzilla.dtd

>-<!ELEMENT bug (bug_id, (alias?, creation_ts, short_desc, delta_ts, reporter_accessible, cclist_accessible, classification_id, classification, product, component, version, rep_platform, op_sys, bug_status, resolution?, bug_file_loc?, status_whiteboard?, keywords*, priority, bug_severity, target_milestone?, dependson*, blocked*, votes?, reporter, assigned_to, qa_contact?, cc*, (estimated_time, remaining_time, actual_time)?, group*, long_desc*, attachment*)?)>
>+<!ELEMENT bug (bug_id, (alias?, creation_ts, short_desc, delta_ts, reporter_accessible, cclist_accessible, classification_id, classification, product, component, version, rep_platform, op_sys, bug_status, resolution?, bug_file_loc?, status_whiteboard?, keywords*, priority, bug_severity, target_milestone?, dependson*, blocked*, votes?, reporter, assigned_to, qa_contact?, cc*, (estimated_time, remaining_time, actual_time)?, group*, long_desc*, attachment*, flag*)?)>

Your element order is a little off here ... flag comes before longdesc, so
should be:

group*, flag*, long_desc*

>+<!ELEMENT attachment (attachid, date, desc, filename?, type?, data?, flag*)>

type comes before filename...
Attachment #195801 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie) → review-
Attached patch v3 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Moved flag to be in the proper order.
I will change the location of filename in show.xml.tmpl so that it matches
here.
Attachment #195801 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #195807 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie)
Attachment #195807 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie)
Attached patch v4Splinter Review
Added another missing element: deadline
Attachment #195807 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #195967 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie)
Attached file test xml file
Attachment #195791 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 195967 [details] [diff] [review]
v4

r=me

I've tested the previous version of this patch, and am doing the deadline
addition by inspection.
Attachment #195967 - Flags: review?(colin.ogilvie) → review+
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: approval?
OS: Linux → All
Hardware: PC → All
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.22
Flags: approval? → approval+
Checking in bugzilla.dtd;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/bugzilla.dtd,v  <--  bugzilla.dtd
new revision: 1.12; previous revision: 1.11
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: