Closed
Bug 349852
Opened 19 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
"I'm added to or removed from this capacity" user pref doesn't work for new bugs
Categories
(Bugzilla :: Email Notifications, defect, P1)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Bugzilla 2.22
People
(Reporter: Wurblzap, Assigned: bugzilla-mozilla)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
1.96 KB,
patch
|
mkanat
:
review+
LpSolit
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The “I'm added to or removed from this capacity” user pref doesn't work for new bugs, at least not for Assignee (didn't test for others). This affects at least 2.22 and tip. I suspect earlier releases to be affected, too.
Steps to reproduce:
o Mangle a test user account userA:
- Switch off all mail notifications
- Switch on “I'm added to or removed from this capacity” for Assignee
o Log on as somebody else (userB)
o File a bug, assigning it to userA
Actual results:
userA is not notified.
Expected results:
userA is notified.
Comment 1•19 years ago
|
||
Didn't we just fix some similar bug about email prefs?
![]() |
||
Comment 2•19 years ago
|
||
I don't know what the format of these quotes are, but Tb didn't like them at all. The bug summary was filed with commas only. :)
mkanat, no, I don't think so as Marc is reporting that 2.22 is affected too while bug 148836 was specific to a recent checkin we did on the trunk.
Summary: “I'm added to or removed from this capacity” user pref doesn't work for new bugs → "I'm added to or removed from this capacity" user pref doesn't work for new bugs
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•19 years ago
|
||
Basically wants_bug_mail does not know if a bug is new. It only 'checks' bug_activity. For a new bug it will not know who is the assignee / QA contact. However, wants_bug_mail is called for every $relationship a user has on the bug. Including the assignee / QA contact roles. So the sub only needs a $is_new variable to figure out the rest.
The !$start (for figuring out if a bug is new or not) is the same check as used for the "New: " subject. See $isnew.
Assignee: email-notifications → bugzilla-mozilla
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #236743 -
Flags: review?(wurblzap)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•19 years ago
|
||
Hmm, I think I should not have limited it to assignee / QA contact as relationship, but instead always set $events{+EVT_ADDED_REMOVED} if $is_new is true.. otherwise this will not work if you are on the CC list, etc. Have to look at it later.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 236743 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v1
(In reply to comment #4)
Ok, this sounds sensible.
Attachment #236743 -
Flags: review?(wurblzap)
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't know what the format of these quotes are, but Tb didn't like them at
> all. The bug summary was filed with commas only. :)
UTF-8... Another reason why related bugs should be fixed soon :)
Flags: blocking3.0?
Flags: blocking2.22.1?
Comment 7•19 years ago
|
||
I could swear we just fixed the "I don't get emails on New bugs" bug, as some separate bug, didn't we?
Does this actually prevent people from getting "New: " emails if they're the assignee? That's pretty critical. If that's the case, then this is definitely a blocker. If it's not the case, then it's not a blocker.
Either way, it's a 3.0 blocker.
Severity: normal → major
Flags: blocking3.0?
Flags: blocking3.0+
Flags: blocking2.22.1?
Flags: blocking2.22.1+
Priority: -- → P1
![]() |
||
Comment 8•19 years ago
|
||
I took bkor's idea but added REL_CC. This patch correctly fixes the problem. I did some basic tests only, but it looks good. r=LpSolit for bkor's patch with the addition of REL_CC to the list, i.e. the patch I'm attaching now.
Requesting a second review, though, so that people do not complain that I'm reviewing my own patches. :)
Attachment #236743 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #239707 -
Flags: review?(mkanat)
![]() |
||
Updated•19 years ago
|
Attachment #239707 -
Flags: review+
Comment 9•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 239707 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1.1
That looks right.
We should change wants_bug_mail to take named parameters, in the future. That's way too many positional parameters. :-)
Attachment #239707 -
Flags: review?(mkanat) → review+
![]() |
||
Comment 10•19 years ago
|
||
This patch works on both tip and 2.22 (I tested).
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.22?
Updated•19 years ago
|
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.22?
Flags: approval2.22+
Flags: approval+
![]() |
||
Comment 11•19 years ago
|
||
tip:
Checking in Bugzilla/BugMail.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/BugMail.pm,v <-- BugMail.pm
new revision: 1.93; previous revision: 1.92
done
Checking in Bugzilla/User.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/User.pm,v <-- User.pm
new revision: 1.132; previous revision: 1.131
done
2.22:
Checking in Bugzilla/BugMail.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/BugMail.pm,v <-- BugMail.pm
new revision: 1.62.2.3; previous revision: 1.62.2.2
done
Checking in Bugzilla/User.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/User.pm,v <-- User.pm
new revision: 1.101.2.4; previous revision: 1.101.2.3
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.
Description
•