Closed Bug 370885 Opened 17 years ago Closed 15 years ago

Arrows in dependency graphs are drawn the wrong way

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Dependency Views, defect)

2.23.4
defect
Not set
minor

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 3.6

People

(Reporter: LpSolit, Assigned: LpSolit)

References

()

Details

(Keywords: ue)

Attachments

(1 file)

Have a look at http://landfill.bugzilla.org/qa30/showdependencygraph.cgi?id=4202 and try to guess the bug blocking all others visible in this graph? 4205 as the base blocker? Good try, but no! It's 4200! All arrows are the wrong way as they are supposed to show the flow to follow in order to fix these bugs (in this case, from left to right).

All arrows should be reversed.
Attached patch patch, v1Splinter Review
"Bug A -> Bug B" now means "Bug A blocks Bug B", so that you now read the workflow from left to right.
Assignee: dependency.views → LpSolit
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review?(wicked+bz)
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Severity: normal → minor
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 3.0
Target Milestone: Bugzilla 3.0 → ---
Comment on attachment 255728 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

Works correctly and arrows make much more sense to me now.
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review?(wicked+bz) → review+
This is going to confuse a lot of people if we do this...

I never really thought of the arrows pointing in a workflow direction, I always just thought of it as a tree.  Where you have the most generic bug at the top of the tree, and the more specific bugs (those that block it) underneath.  Then again, the reason I always think about it that way is probably just because I had data structures class in college and that's how you would defined a linked tree on the back end probably.

Guess I'd love to see some opinions on this somewhere before we make a call on it.  And I'm thinking we did this already and I'm surprised to see so few comments.  Was there a discussion about this already somewhere?
Keywords: ue
the work flow concept is the easiest to understand.  In particular, when you are using Bugzilla for other bug like (tracking issues against products /documents) situations. 
well, given that dependency graphs rarely work on bmo, i doubt anyone cared about such minutiae :)
Comment on attachment 255728 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

Fwiw, r=Wurblzap as my vote for the workflow view.
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review+
I think this isn't a matter of an arrow change, but of adding some string that describes the image.  

If it's a dependency graph, then the active phrase without being specified is "depends on"  that is, it's a drawing of "x depends on y."  In that context the arrows are in fact correct.  To switch the arrows, the phrase would be "y blocks x."

I think the graph in question would also be easier to read if 4204 were above 4203, which is also accomplished by moving 4201 above 4202.
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Whiteboard: [zombie; kind of WONTFIX]
Attachment #255728 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 255728 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

Actually, I agree with this. I think this direction makes more sense.
Flags: approval?
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 3.6
3 r+ is enough for me. :)
Flags: approval? → approval+
Whiteboard: [zombie; kind of WONTFIX]
Checking in showdependencygraph.cgi;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/showdependencygraph.cgi,v  <--  showdependencygraph.cgi
new revision: 1.68; previous revision: 1.67
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Keywords: relnote
Added to the release notes in bug 547466.
Keywords: relnote
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: