Dependency Tree : View As Issue List or Change Several should include root bug




Creating/Changing Bugs
12 years ago
6 years ago


(Reporter: Andrew Stadler, Unassigned)





12 years ago
I have bugs 100 and 101.
I have bug 102 which depends on 100,101.
Bug 102 has just been made part of our next milestone - which makes 100 and 101 part of that milestone, too.

Go to bug 100, and click "show dependency tree".  You see bugs 101,102.
Click "Change Several".  You only get 101,102.

This means that in order to assign a single group of related bugs to a single milestone, I have to do it twice - once for the root and once for the blockers.  It would be much nicer if I could be presented with all of them including the root, click "check all", and enter the new milestone.

(I think this would also be reasonable behavior for the related "view as issue list" link)

Comment 1

12 years ago
I'm actually not really sure what we should do here. Some people might expect it one way, others would expect it differently.

Of course, we show the root bug in the tree itself, so perhaps we should show it in the resulting list.
Severity: normal → minor
OS: Linux → All
Hardware: PC → All

Comment 2

12 years ago
Here is why I think it's a good change to make, because in both cases there are positive gains, little/no adverse effects, and no forced situations where the previous behavior cannot be achieved.

In the case of "change several":

You gain the ability to make a bulk change in one shot instead of in two passes, which adds both convenience and accuracy.  
You don't lose functionality or adversely affect the user who expects it to work "the old way", because everything comes up un-checked anyway - it's easy to avoid the root bug when selecting those bugs to bulk change.

In the case of "view as issue list":

Again, this simply adds a bit of information (the root bug) to the list, and doesn't remove anything from the list.

Yes, you can describe some minor impacts on a user who truly demands it to work "the old way" - e.g., "Change Several" followed by "Check All" has a slightly different outcome.  But since these types of scenarios are not forced - there are simple workarounds or behavior changes available - there's no reason not to add the functionality.

I believe the convenience and improved accuracy outweighs any negatives.

Comment 3

11 years ago
I changed this on our system by changing the dependency-tree.html.tmpl to give  two extra links to include the root.  The links now look like: "( view as bug list  | change several | view as bug list [incl. root]  | change several [incl. root] )"

Quick diff:

--- default/bug/dependency-tree.html.tmpl       2007-04-01 10:18:19.000000000 -0400
+++ custom/bug/dependency-tree.html.tmpl        2007-05-03 15:32:56.000000000 -0400
@@ -85,7 +85,12 @@
     <a href="buglist.cgi?bug_id=[% ids.join(",") %]">view as [% terms.bug %] list</a>
     [% IF user.groups.editbugs && ids.size > 1 %]
       | <a href="buglist.cgi?bug_id=[% ids.join(",") %]&amp;tweak=1">change several</a>
-    [% END %])
+    [% END %]
+    [% IF maxdepth -%]Up to [% maxdepth %] level[% "s" IF maxdepth > 1 %] deep | [% END -%]
+     | <a href="buglist.cgi?bug_id=[% bugid %],[% ids.join(","a) %]">view as [% terms.bug %] list [incl. root]</a>
+    [% IF user.groups.editbugs && ids.size > 1 %]
+      | <a href="buglist.cgi?bug_id=[% bugid %],[% ids.join(",") %]&amp;tweak=1">change several [incl. root]</a>
+    [% END %] )
     <ul class="tree">
       [% INCLUDE display_tree tree=$tree_name %]
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.