When the bug summary (or any other piece of metadata) is changed, Bugzilla (or, at least, BMO) now shows that in the course of the discussion, instead of just on the History page. However, it does not show the original values of the settings with comment 0. This makes it difficult to determine in advance what assumptions are made by the bug reporter when the bug was originally reported. For example, say I come across a bug with the summary "Fix XYZ to reduce user confusion". I then begin reading the discussion, beginning with comment 0. In that comment the bug reporter is discussing how "ABC doesn't work". Without knowing the original bug summary, I have no way to know ahead of time why the bug reporter is talking about ABC when the bug is ostensibly about XYZ. In fact, I have no way of knowing that the bug summary has even changed until I get to that point in the discussion where it did. I think it would be helpful to display the original values of the metadata alongside the first comment, almost as if the values were changed from NULL to their first values.
while i see how in rare circumstances it would be useful, in most instances i fear it would be just additional noise on the bug. bear in mind there's a minimum of 12 fields set when a bug is created, although most have more.
(In reply to Byron Jones ‹:glob› from comment #1) > while i see how in rare circumstances it would be useful, in most instances > i fear it would be just additional noise on the bug. bear in mind there's a > minimum of 12 fields set when a bug is created, although most have more. Well, my primary reason for suggesting it was to get the original bug summary. (Maybe product/component, too?) What if it were just that?
You already have this information in the bug history.
(In reply to Frédéric Buclin from comment #3) > You already have this information in the bug history. I don't see what your point is. You already have the other changes in the bug history, too, and yet there is an established need for them to appear inline.