Closed Bug 787478 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

Create Custom Entry Form for Data Safety/Legal/Security/Privacy Assurance Bugs

Categories

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: Extensions, defect)

Product:
bugzilla.mozilla.org
Component:
Extensions
Version:
Production
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: ckoehler, Assigned: dkl)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

Patch to create new extension for creating Moz Project Review bugs (v3)
59.68 KB, patch
dkl
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review 
We would like to have a single form to facilitate the creation of all required data safety, legal, security and privacy assurance bugs.

Draft requirements here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Websites/Kick-Off_Form/Requirements

Please take a look and let me know if you have any concerns.

Would it be possible to have a something on stage to review by the end of next week (7 September)?
Thanks. Will take a look at the wiki (quite a bit of information to go through :) and hopefully start working on this today or tuesday of next week (Mon is holiday). We normally do code pushes on Thursdays so it may not make it for next weeks push if the code is complex enough to require peer review. It then may be the next Thursday. What is the final deadline for this? We can definitely have something for review before the end of next week though.

dkl
Assignee: nobody → dkl
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
We'd really like to have this launch before the end of Q3 (it's a high priority goal for teams involved). If the form is pushed on 9/16 and we start QA'ing that day, getting feedback to you promptly, do you think it's possible to launch in production by the end of September?

Feel free to ping me with questions, either on IRC or email for any questions about the requirements.
(In reply to Christie Koehler [:ckoehler] from comment #2)
> We'd really like to have this launch before the end of Q3 (it's a high
> priority goal for teams involved). If the form is pushed on 9/16 and we
> start QA'ing that day, getting feedback to you promptly, do you think it's
> possible to launch in production by the end of September?

What I meant was that we would have it in production by next thursday or the next. We can have it set up on our internal test instance for your review as soon as the code is ready.
So you do not need this form to be in production until the end of September? We can definitely finish the work now and hold off pushing it live til when you need us to.

dkl
Any updates?

Also, to clarify the timing: this is a q3 priority goal for the teams involved, so launching by the end of September (or earlier) is ideal.
(In reply to Christie Koehler [:ckoehler] from comment #4)
> Any updates?
> 
> Also, to clarify the timing: this is a q3 priority goal for the teams
> involved, so launching by the end of September (or earlier) is ideal.

Sorry for the delay. I have done some work on the form but it is not quite ready for feedback due to the amount of work involved and shuffling of other tasks. I will be working on this tomorrow and some over the weekend. Hopefully I will have something for your review on Monday/Tuesday. As I mentioned before we have staging servers for you to test all of this before going live. Once you are satisfied with the result, it will be pushed to production in the next code push (Thursdays) so I see no reason this will not be fully complete by the end of Sept, probably earlier.

dkl
Dkl,

Just wanted to checkin here and see if there is something we can start looking at.

Thanks!
(In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #6)
> Dkl,
> 
> Just wanted to checkin here and see if there is something we can start
> looking at.
> 
> Thanks!

I am working on it pretty much full time now but have not yet gotten to the point where I can push something working to our stage site for review. Hopefully later today or tomorrow. I was not able to dedicate as much time last week as I had hoped due to my own goals but it shouldn't be long now. FWIW, I just got this task at the beginning of last week and it is not a small project :) Thanks for your patience.

dkl
I have the form itself ready for review. I am still working on the backend code for actually creating the extra bugs themselves so don't hit submit just as yet. Things to look at are the questions being asked and when selecting certain values, whether the right additional questions pop up. Please give it a try.

https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

dkl
Great!

Here are a few comments
Initial Question:
"Summary" should be "Project/Feature Name"

Privacy
* User Data Description
The User Data description is currently 
"User Data: 	Do you currently have a privacy policy for your project / site / product?"  
It should be 
"Does your product/service/project collect, use or maintain any user data? "

* Legal Bug: For reference, please provide link to related Legal bug 
can we change this to 
Legal Bug: For reference, please provide link to related Legal bug or enter "not filed" if a legal bug has not yet been filed.

Legal
* Cc: please add description of "Who should be cc'ed on this legal bug?"


Data Safety
* There are three questions that can be initially hidden and only shown if the answer to the following question is "YES"
"Separate Party: 	Will any user data be shared or accessed by third party partners, customers or providers? "
Those three questions are:
Separate Party Data Type:
Separate Party Data Communication:
Who are the separate parties?:
(In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #9)
> Great!
> 
> Here are a few comments

Thanks for the feedback. I have addressed the form changes you asked for and have a new version of the form up for review.

https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

I had to switch from table based layout to css/divs since I could not easily do the hiding of rows using nested tbody tags.

I am still working on the submit part and should have that up for review shortly.

Question: Should I assume that all fields are required fields if they are visible?

dkl
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Websites/Kick-Off_Form/Requirements#Form_Step_2:_Generating_Bugs 

I do not see a question in the above or below details about asking " Hosted not by Mozilla or in the cloud" but yet it is in the matrix for determining which bugs to create. Is there a question missing?

Also I see a conflict issue with question 12a and 14a. Should I be creating a separate legal bug for each of those questions since they are each being used to decide which component to choose for the bug? If the user selects a value for each, that would be two different components which is not possible for a single bug.

Thanks
dkl
(In reply to David Lawrence [:dkl] from comment #11)
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Websites/Kick-Off_Form/Requirements#Form_Step_2:
> _Generating_Bugs 
> 
> I do not see a question in the above or below details about asking " Hosted
> not by Mozilla or in the cloud" but yet it is in the matrix for determining
> which bugs to create. Is there a question missing?
> 

We removed that question. So nope, don't need to add it.

> Also I see a conflict issue with question 12a and 14a. Should I be creating
> a separate legal bug for each of those questions since they are each being
> used to decide which component to choose for the bug? If the user selects a
> value for each, that would be two different components which is not possible
> for a single bug.

Only create 1 legal bug.  If question 14a is answered, then go by those values if they conflict with 12a
David,

Our goal for this quarter is to get the form correctly filing all the dependent bugs and also have a version in bmo for live testing.  We'll have small refinements and changes as we get feedback, but we can address these next quarter.

Are we looking good to push this to bmo before the end of the month?

Thanks!
(In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #13)
> Are we looking good to push this to bmo before the end of the month?

sorry, but david is currently on leave, and isn't back until the 29th.
the earliest i'd expect to see this live would be on 4th oct.
Ok, sorry for the delay due to PTO. Ready for some more feedback. Got bug submission working now so please try to create some test project reviews. 

Here is one sample I just did:
https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=686629

The for is located at:
https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

dkl

        Attachment #666650 -
        Flags: review?(glob)

    
    

    
  
Comment on attachment 666650 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to create new extension for creating Moz Project Review bugs (v2)

Review of attachment 666650 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

most of this looks excellent, except i have concerns about the legal group membership hack (see notes near the code).

as discussed on irc, this can be removed, because right now anyone can file legal bugs via https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/form.legal

r=glob with that code removed

::: extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/create-moz-project-review.html.tmpl
@@ +237,5 @@
> +                  onchange="toggleVisibleById(this,'> $25,000','finance_questions');">
> +            <option value="">Select One</option>
> +            <option value="N/A">N/A</option>
> +            <option value="<= $25,000">&lt;= $25,000</option>
> +            <option value="> $25,000">&gt; $25,000</option>

encode the < and > that are within the value attribute.

@@ +264,5 @@
> +    <div id="sec_review_date_row" class="field_row">
> +      <span class="field_label">Review Due Date:</span>
> +      <span class="field_data">
> +        <div class="field_description">When would you like the review to be completed?
> +          (<a href="https://mail.mozilla.com/home/ckoenig@mozilla.com/Security%20Review.html">more info</a>)</div>

should probably open this link in a new tab.

::: extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook/global/messages-messages.html.tmpl
@@ +1,5 @@
> +[% IF message_tag == "moz_project_review_creation_failed" %]
> +  The parent [% terms.bug %] was created successfully,  but creation of
> +  the dependent [% terms.bugs %] failed. The error has been logged
> +  and no further action is required at this time.
> +[% END %]

needs a boilerplate

::: extensions/MozProjectReview/web/js/moz_project_review.js
@@ +12,5 @@
> +    var vendor_cost_select  = YAHOO.util.Dom.get('vendor_cost');
> +
> +    if (mozilla_data_select.value == 'Yes') {
> +        YAHOO.util.Dom.removeClass('legal_questions','bz_default_hidden');
> +        YAHOO.util.Dom.removeClass('privacy_policy_project_questions','bz_default_hidden');

nit: missing space after commas (lines 15 and 16)

@@ +18,5 @@
> +        YAHOO.util.Dom.removeClass('sec_review_questions', 'bz_default_hidden');
> +    }
> +    else {
> +        YAHOO.util.Dom.addClass('legal_questions','bz_default_hidden');
> +        YAHOO.util.Dom.addClass('privacy_policy_project_questions','bz_default_hidden');

nit: missing space after commas (lines 21 and 22)

@@ +78,5 @@
> +        if (!isFilledOut('data_access')) alert_text += "Please select a value for data access\n";
> +        if (!isFilledOut('vendor_cost')) alert_text += "Please select a value for vendor cost\n";
> +    }
> +
> +    if(alert_text == '') {

nit: missing space after 'if'

@@ +88,5 @@
> +}
> +
> +YAHOO.util.Event.onDOMReady(function() {
> +
> +});

can be removed :)

@@ +105,5 @@
> +
> +//Takes a DOM element id and makes sure that it is filled out
> +function isFilledOut(elem_id)  {
> +    var str = document.getElementById(elem_id).value;
> +    return str.length>0 && str!="noneselected";

nit: add spaces around operators.

@@ +110,5 @@
> +}
> +
> +function isChecked(elem_id) {
> +    return document.getElementById(elem_id).checked;
> +}

isChecked() isn't used, and should be removed.

        Attachment #666650 -
        Flags: review?(glob) → review+

    
    

    
  


  
Thanks glob. I have attached updated patch here and moved r+ forward.

I have also committed the recent changes to our test instance to allow the reporter(s) to give more feedback and sign off on pushing this to production.

https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

dkl

        Attachment #666650 -
        Attachment is obsolete: true

        Attachment #667155 -
        Flags: review+

    
    

    
  
DKL,

Here are a few additional changes. These 3 requests are for the finance bug form.

Finance Bug (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Websites/Kick-Off_Form/Requirements#Finance)

#1
Additional Question for finance bug form
Question: What is the urgency of this request?
Style: Dropdown
Options:
- within 24 hours
- 1 to 3 days
- a week
- no rush


#2
Text Change
Replace "What is the anticipated cost of the vendor relationship?"
with
"What is the anticipated cost of the vendor relationship? (Entire Contract Cost, not monthly cost)"

#3
Additional Question for finance bug form (please add after the question "What is the alternative?")
Question: "Is this line item in budget?"
Style: Dropdown
Options: Yes, No

    
    

    
  
Bug - Legal Bugs are not being generated with stage tip. Perhaps this is a bug or maybe stage tip doesn't have the right group.

See test bug 686665 which correctly displayed the legal form but did not result in a legal bug being filed:
https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=686665

For testing purposes I answered yes to question #11
Does this product/service/project access, interact with, or store Mozilla (customer, contributor, user, employee) data? Example of such data includes email addresses, first and last name, addresses, phone numbers, credit card data.

    
    

    
  
Changes applied and I have fixed the legal bug creation issue.

https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

While you are reviewing, couple questions:

1. Would it be better if the date related fields were a calendar popup widget?
2. Would it be better to have the urgency field in the initial questions to be a drop down of choices or left as a free text field?

dkl
Flags: needinfo?(ckoehler)

    
    

    
  
(In reply to David Lawrence [:dkl] from comment #21)
> Changes applied and I have fixed the legal bug creation issue.

Great, we'll take a look

> https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.
> org&format=moz-project-review
> 
> While you are reviewing, couple questions:
> 
> 1. Would it be better if the date related fields were a calendar popup
> widget?

Yes, that sounds great.

> 2. Would it be better to have the urgency field in the initial questions to
> be a drop down of choices or left as a free text field?

Drop down of choices please.

    
    

    
  
(In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #22)
> > 2. Would it be better to have the urgency field in the initial questions to
> > be a drop down of choices or left as a free text field?
> 
> Drop down of choices please.

Thanks for the reply. Would you or someone be able to give me a list of choices? In the other urgency drop down such as Finance, we have time periods. Would I just reuse that list or something different?

dkl

    
    

    
  
(In reply to David Lawrence [:dkl] from comment #23)
> (In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #22)
> > > 2. Would it be better to have the urgency field in the initial questions to
> > > be a drop down of choices or left as a free text field?
> > 
> > Drop down of choices please.
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Would you or someone be able to give me a list of
> choices? In the other urgency drop down such as Finance, we have time
> periods. Would I just reuse that list or something different?
> 
Please use the following for everywhere else (except Finance form):
2 days
a week
2-4 weeks
no rush

    
    

    
  
This is great! Sorry I forgot to mention this. But all the questions under the Finance form are required. They can't leave any of them blank. Once this fix goes into stage, then I'm good from the Finance portion. Thanks everyone

    
    

    
  
I don't think Alina has reviewed for privacy yet, so I've added her to this bug.

Here are my changes and suggestions:

Remove description and URL fields from legal section of questionnaire since those are captured in the initial section

Listed CCs shouldn't show up in comment 0 but rather in the CC list

Add a note above the SOW details box of the legal section that says "if applicable"

I suggest moving the timeframe for completion field out of the legal section and into the general section at the top, and make it a required field

Make Priority in the legal section a required field

Shouldn't some of the other fields in the team sections be required?

I would change the description next to Current Goal to say "Does it support a current Mozilla goal" to clarify we're looking for the major company goals not personal or unrelated team goals.

All legal bugs should automatically cc handerson@mozilla.com, jmurdock@mozilla.com, denelle@mozilla.com, jmenon@mozilla.com, dalmendral@mozilla.com, liz@mozilla.com, and kwilliams@mozilla.com. (It's already set this way in Bugzilla, so no action may be needed for this.)

Any bugs in the Distribution/Bundling, Marketplace, Persona, Search, and Standards components should have Denelle assigned as the QA contact. (It's already set this way in Bugzilla, so no action may be needed for this.)

Will the default status be "New" as it is for legal bugs currently?

    
    

    
  
(In reply to Liz Compton from comment #26)
> Remove description and URL fields from legal section of questionnaire since
> those are captured in the initial section

Done

> Listed CCs shouldn't show up in comment 0 but rather in the CC list

Done

> Add a note above the SOW details box of the legal section that says "if
> applicable"

Done

> I suggest moving the timeframe for completion field out of the legal section
> and into the general section at the top, and make it a required field

Would that be similar to release date already in the general section?

> Make Priority in the legal section a required field

Done

> Shouldn't some of the other fields in the team sections be required?

Not sure. They need to chime in with that information.
 
> I would change the description next to Current Goal to say "Does it support
> a current Mozilla goal" to clarify we're looking for the major company goals
> not personal or unrelated team goals.

Done
 
> Will the default status be "New" as it is for legal bugs currently?

Yes.

    
    

    
  
Thanks! I tried submitting the form again and didn't see the changes. Is there a different link for the updated form?

On the timeframe question, I think that's basically the same as your suggestion of having a pick list for urgency. If you've done that, then you can just remove the timeframe for completion field from the legal section.

    
    

    
  
(In reply to Liz Compton from comment #28)
> Thanks! I tried submitting the form again and didn't see the changes. Is
> there a different link for the updated form?

Sorry. I had made the changes in my local tree and not yet committed when I made the comment. The new version should be available on our test instance shortly.

https://bugzilla-stage-tip.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

> On the timeframe question, I think that's basically the same as your
> suggestion of having a pick list for urgency. If you've done that, then you
> can just remove the timeframe for completion field from the legal section.

Ok. done.

dkl

    
    

    
  
Thanks David. Adding Tom from the privacy team.

I have a few additional comments/questions for the group:

1) Mozilla Project and Mozilla Related seem somewhat duplicative, except one is a limited drop down and the other a free form field. Do we need both?

2) The "Points of Contact" field requires entry of bugzilla email addresses but whatever is entered into that field doesn't seem to show up in either the cc field or comment zero. Would it be OK to allow names and email addresses and then have those just show up in comment zero? If the idea is that these are the people to be cced, I'd want it clarified that only internal people should be listed. For example, if it's a vendor agreement, someone might list a contact from the vendor. It wouldn't be OK to have them copied on the legal bug (in order to maintain attorney-client privilege). If this field is intended for ccs, perhaps the title could be changed to "Mozilla Points of Contact" and then have the note say "Please provide the email addresses of internal contacts who should be cced on this review." If that's done, then the cc field can be removed from the legal section. If instead the names and email addresses will go into comment zero, then the cc field in the legal section should be retained, but something like the above suggested note should be added, such as "Please only list internal ccs". I didn't think of that before.

3)  In the legal bug in comment zero, "Timeframe:" still shows up as a field, even though it has been removed from the questionnaire.

4) I'm not sure why a privacy/vendor review bug was opened when I selected "Distribution/bundling" as the type of relationship rather than vendor/services.

I just created tracking Bug 686697 if anyone wants to look at it and the resulting bugs.

    
    

    
  
Thanks for the feedback Liz.

(In reply to Liz Compton from comment #30)
> 2) The "Points of Contact" field requires entry of bugzilla email addresses
> but whatever is entered into that field doesn't seem to show up in either
> the cc field or comment zero. Would it be OK to allow names and email
> addresses and then have those just show up in comment zero? If the idea is
> that these are the people to be cced, I'd want it clarified that only
> internal people should be listed. For example, if it's a vendor agreement,
> someone might list a contact from the vendor. It wouldn't be OK to have them
> copied on the legal bug (in order to maintain attorney-client privilege). If
> this field is intended for ccs, perhaps the title could be changed to
> "Mozilla Points of Contact" and then have the note say "Please provide the
> email addresses of internal contacts who should be cced on this review." If
> that's done, then the cc field can be removed from the legal section. If
> instead the names and email addresses will go into comment zero, then the cc
> field in the legal section should be retained, but something like the above
> suggested note should be added, such as "Please only list internal ccs". I
> didn't think of that before.

Originally I had "Points of Contact" as a freeform text field and it was requested that it be changed in such a way that the contacts be added as CC to the top level bug. I can easily change it back to a freeform field. Another possibility is to have a free form field that when the bugs are created, if the email is a valid Bugzilla account, it adds it to the CC field as well, and the others it just has in comment 0.

Also to answer your other concern, only users in the CC field under Legal questions get added to the cc list of the legal bug created. The "Points of Contact" values are only added to the top level bug and not also the others.

> 3)  In the legal bug in comment zero, "Timeframe:" still shows up as a
> field, even though it has been removed from the questionnaire.

Bug. Will fix on next iteration.
 
> 4) I'm not sure why a privacy/vendor review bug was opened when I selected
> "Distribution/bundling" as the type of relationship rather than
> vendor/services.

Bug. Will fix on next iteration.
 
Thanks
dkl

    
    

    
  
Since only the people in the CC field under Legal questions get added to the cc list of the legal bug created, I'm OK leaving "Points of Contact" as is or changing it as you described. I'll leave it to others to weigh in on that.

    
    

    
  
David,

We're ready to push this version life to production. We're going to use it for some real projects and then we may have a few rounds of updates. We can work those into stage and test them before updating prod again.


Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(ckoehler)

    
    

    
  
Thanks! We will open new bugs for any future issues. I will create a new "Extensions: MozProjectReview" component under the BMO product.

Committing to: bzr+ssh://dlawrence%40mozilla.com@bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/4.0                
added extensions/MozProjectReview
added extensions/MozProjectReview/Config.pm
added extensions/MozProjectReview/Extension.pm
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/mozprojectreview
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-data-safety.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-finance.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-legal.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-policy.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-tech.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-vendor.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-sec-review.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/create-moz-project-review.html.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook/global
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook/global/messages-messages.html.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/js
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/style
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/js/moz_project_review.js
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/style/moz_project_review.css
Committed revision 8369.

Committing to: bzr+ssh://dlawrence%40mozilla.com@bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/4.2                
added extensions/MozProjectReview
added extensions/MozProjectReview/Config.pm
added extensions/MozProjectReview/Extension.pm
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-data-safety.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-finance.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-legal.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-policy.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-tech.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-privacy-vendor.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review-sec-review.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/comment-moz-project-review.txt.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/bug/create/create-moz-project-review.html.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook/global
added extensions/MozProjectReview/template/en/default/hook/global/messages-messages.html.tmpl
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/js
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/style
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/js/moz_project_review.js
added extensions/MozProjectReview/web/style/moz_project_review.css
Committed revision 8394.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

    
    

    
  
Thanks David.

Will the new form appear at this link?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-project-review

About when do you think it will be live?

    
    

    
  
(In reply to Michael Coates [:mcoates] from comment #36)
> Thanks David.
> 
> Will the new form appear at this link?
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=mozilla.org&format=moz-
> project-review

Yes. Actually I can also create a shortcut (haven't done it yet but will do it now) that would look similar to how we have some of the other forms:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/form.moz-project-review

or

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/form.moz.project.review

> About when do you think it will be live?

Normally we update on Thursdays but glob (the one who normally does the push) is not feeling well at the moment. He normally works closely with IT in his timezone to coordinate the code pushes each week. I would imagine as soon as he is feeling better we can go ahead and do a code push as we have other changes queued up as well. Maybe sunday night / monday morning.

dkl

    
    

    
  
Committing to: bzr+ssh://dlawrence%40mozilla.com@bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/4.0             
modified .htaccess
Committed revision 8370
No longer blocks: 817150
Depends on: 817150
No longer blocks: 816349
Depends on: 816349
No longer blocks: 816351
Depends on: 816351
No longer blocks: 816352
Depends on: 816352
Depends on: 819022
Depends on: 832031
Component: Extensions: BMO → Extensions

          You need to log in
          before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.