Closed Bug 49862 Opened 23 years ago Closed 23 years ago
Make new bug default to blank priority
tara/asa/endico, can we make it so a new bug (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?) auto fills with a blank Priority, not P3 please? Eng Mgrs are using this field a lot more to prioritize work, and when it auto fills with P3 it messes them up. I will be requesting the same in Bugscape from namachi. Thanks! -Jan
There's no such thing as a blank priority. I think it would be a bad idea to invent one. This is a mozilla.org issue. Assigning to asa
Assignee: tara → asa
Why would this be bad? The engineer/engineer mgr should be setting the priority. With a system default of p3 -- we have no idea if the bug has been evaluated and the priority set, or if it was just a default setting -- consequently, a p3 setting means absolutely nothing, it's bogus -- and that clearly should not be the case.
should changing assignee clear the priority as well?
OS: Windows 95 → other
Hardware: PC → Other
It seems to me there are plenty of ways to see if the bug has been evaluated. If the bug has been Accepted, if the bug has a Target Milestone, if the bug has comments from the Assignee. Shouldn't the priority be set when the bug is Accepted and a Target Milestone be set based on that. If that's the case then any accepted bug with a Priority of 3 it is safe to assume that it has been triaged as a P3 and not defaulted there. Maybe I'm missing something... As far as how to do it, there currently isn't a -- value for that field so would this have to be a change to the core bugzilla code and then updated at particular instalations?
ok, so I look at the milestone, I look at assigned to, I look at the comments, I look at the status, I look at whatever -- which one of those is a hands down guarantee that the priority is really a p3 or whether it was an oversight? Convince me on that one, and I 'll gladly drop the request. What am I missing? What is the issue? The -- is available under milestone selection, so it isn't like this is a new phenomena.
it's not as easy as flipping a switch from defaulting P3 to defaulting --. There is no unset -- item to defualt to. I'm not going to argue that it shouldn't happen, I'm just suggesting that until it does we're not completely blocked from using Priority. I guess this is a bug in Bugzilla and not a bug in our installations. So should this go to tara?
Yes...assigning to tara. My understanding is that the priority field is used for engineers (both internal and external) to order they work load. Having it default to blank is very good. Otherwise, they can never use P3. It won't ever be correct since all new bugs default to this. Make sense?
Assignee: asa → tara
Unless I'm mistaken, this has already been fixed on bugzilla.mozilla.org and is a config issue, not a code issue...
this is a config issue and has been FIXED for bugzilla.mozilla.org
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 23 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Severity: critical → minor
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
OS: other → All
Priority: P3 → P5
Hardware: Other → All
Resolution: FIXED → ---
I'm reopening this as I'd like to see the default bugzilla installation ship with a '---' priority. I think it's the right thing to do.
Making this the default is an easy patch... I should be able to do it Monday (unless someone beats me to it). It's a quick change to checkconfig.pl and defparams.pl. Please Note, this will change the default for new installs, but not for old/established ones.
Will there be instructions for people upgrading on how to change it to --- by default if they want to?
We could release note it, saying how to do it and explaining why we think it's a good thing.
It's an easy process... we could do various things I guess... release note it, post it in the NG have ./checksetup say something about it... 1) Edit localconfig and change: > @priorities = ( > "P1", - To - > @priorities = ( > "--", > "P1", 2) Go to Edit params and change the "defaultpriority" to "--"
I don't think we should automatically do it. Some people might want it otherwise. Should we enforce what we consider to be good practice? Maybe. But if we allow the '---' to be removed, then we shouldn't force it to be added. If we prevented if from being removed, it'd be another matter.
Absolutely. I see no problem on making it the default for new installs. I also see no problem with recommending it for existing installs (and providing instructions for making the change), but I do see a problem with forcing the change. Question: Is there even a "release notes" for bugzilla?
This is lot of discussion for something that's already 100% configurable and really a site-specific usage issue. Please to be leaving the defaults alone. For the record, Bugzilla doesn't have release notes, but extending README is the next best thing.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 23 years ago → 23 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
There will be no verification from me here until Tara explains why the new installation defaults shouldn't be changed.
moving to Bugzilla product reassign to default owner/qa for INVALID/WONTFIX/WORKSFORME/DUPLICATE
Assignee: tara → justdave
Component: Bugzilla → Bugzilla-General
Product: Webtools → Bugzilla
Version: other → unspecified
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.