Fields chosen for Simple Bug Filing should be configurable in the admin UI

ASSIGNED
Assigned to

Status

()

Bugzilla
Creating/Changing Bugs
--
enhancement
ASSIGNED
8 years ago
4 years ago

People

(Reporter: Csilla Deák Gáborné, Assigned: timello)

Tracking

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

8 years ago
User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; hu; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)
Build Identifier: 3.4.4.

The visible fields on UI should be configured in case of Simple Bug Filing. E.g. using Bugzilla for IT support, priority field would be a good choice for Simple Filing UI. 

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. File a bug
2. Choose Hide Advanced Fields

Actual Results:  
Visible fields are standard, can not be configured.

Expected Results:  
Administrator have a possibility to configure fields visible on Simple Bug Filing UI.
We can and do configure them on bugzilla.mozilla.org by modifying the templates and providing alternate templates for special purposes.  I'm assuming you mean in your own Bugzilla and not ours...
Assignee: nobody → ui
Component: Bugzilla: Other b.m.o Issues → User Interface
Product: mozilla.org → Bugzilla
QA Contact: other-bmo-issues → default-qa
Version: other → unspecified

Comment 2

8 years ago
improved the summary a bit. But to be honest I get the feeling that this feature wil be at the bottom of the list. However, if you'd like we could probably make an extension/hook that lets you define it in code more easily, but I'm sure you'd agree we should focus on other UI improvements before this one. 

I could also make a screencast to help walk you and others through this if you like.
Summary: Fields chosen for Simple Bug Filing should be configured → Fields chosen for Simple Bug Filing should be configurable in the admin UI
(Reporter)

Comment 3

8 years ago
we need a solution which will not be overwritten by a Bugzilla upgrade. It would be nice if you can give me detailed instruction to implement a change on UI - actually Hardware and OS fields are irrelevant at us in most cases, but we use the proirity field intensively besides severity field.

Comment 4

8 years ago
If we write a hook in Bugzilla, the hook would be supported by future upgrades. The thing that might not be supported is what is done in the hook. But maybe we can work on that. I'll post the hook and screencast to my blog and we'll see what you think. I'll post on this bug when I have the screencast up.

Updated

8 years ago
Assignee: ui → create-and-change
Component: User Interface → Creating/Changing Bugs
OS: Windows XP → All
Hardware: x86 → All
Version: unspecified → 3.4.4
(Assignee)

Updated

6 years ago
Assignee: create-and-change → timello
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
(Assignee)

Updated

6 years ago
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
(Assignee)

Comment 5

6 years ago
Created attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Minimal change to accomplish more granularity on configuring what field should whether be considered a 'expert_field' or not. This patch adds a new hook 'expert_fields' in the create.html.tmpl template.
Attachment #584967 - Flags: review?(guy.pyrzak)
(Reporter)

Comment 6

6 years ago
Comment on attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Review of attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

we tested it with the latest release, but faild at some points, see below
 bugzilla-4.0.3]$ patch -p0 < ../bmo_539932_v1.diff 
patching file template/en/default/bug/create/create.html.tmpl
Hunk #1 succeeded at 317 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #2 FAILED at 355.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 408 (offset -3 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded at 428 (offset -3 lines).
Hunk #5 succeeded at 447 (offset -3 lines).
Hunk #6 succeeded at 456 (offset -3 lines).
Hunk #7 FAILED at 476.
Hunk #8 succeeded at 504 (offset -1 lines).
2 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file template/en/default/bug/create/create.html.tmpl.rej
(Assignee)

Comment 7

6 years ago
(In reply to Csilla Deák Gáborné from comment #6)
The patch is against trunk and not 4.0 branch.

Comment 8

6 years ago
Comment on attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

pyrzak doesn't seem to be around anymore. Ask glob instead.
Attachment #584967 - Flags: review?(guy.pyrzak) → review?(glob)
(Assignee)

Comment 9

5 years ago
glob, any chance to review this bug? It still applies cleanly. Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(glob)

Comment 10

4 years ago
(The review flag is already set. No need for a separate needinfo request.)
Flags: needinfo?(glob)
Comment on attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Review of attachment 584967 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

this looks like a great start, however it doesn't allow for true field-by-field control.

for example, any field within an expert_fields tbody won't be visible, even if an extension modifies expert_fields (keywords is an example of this, but there are others).

the hook also needs an example in the Example extension.
Attachment #584967 - Flags: review?(glob) → review-
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.