Last Comment Bug 92515 - Should be able to change resolution without re-opening...
: Should be able to change resolution without re-opening...
: selenium
Product: Bugzilla
Classification: Server Software
Component: Creating/Changing Bugs (show other bugs)
: 2.12
: All All
-- enhancement with 3 votes (vote)
: Bugzilla 3.0
Assigned To: Frédéric Buclin
: default-qa
: 136631 179104 187640 285540 295724 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 87840 337026
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2001-07-26 17:31 PDT by Stephen Rasku
Modified: 2012-12-18 20:46 PST (History)
16 users (show)
myk: approval+
LpSolit: testcase+
See Also:
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---

patch, v1 (6.81 KB, patch)
2006-03-11 13:28 PST, Frédéric Buclin
wicked: review-
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
patch, v2 (7.41 KB, patch)
2006-03-14 13:31 PST, Frédéric Buclin
wicked: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
selenium test, v1 (756 bytes, patch)
2011-02-05 13:55 PST, Frédéric Buclin
LpSolit: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description User image Stephen Rasku 2001-07-26 17:31:03 PDT
Quite often, users will use the wrong resolution when resolving a bug.  For
example, using (FIXED instead of INVALID or WORKSFORME).  In order to change the
resolution, I need to re-open and and re-resolve.  This generates two e-mails
for nitpicking so I don't usually do it.  

It should be possible to change the resolution without having to reopen.
Possibly there could be a permission which controlled who had this privilege.
Comment 1 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2001-07-26 17:39:47 PDT
I've often wished for this myself. :-)
Comment 2 User image Matthew Tuck [:CodeMachine] 2001-07-27 00:55:49 PDT
If we do this, then I'd say that anyone who can do it in two steps should be
able to do it in one.
Comment 3 User image Stephen Rasku 2001-07-27 08:05:22 PDT
OK.  Fair enough.
Comment 4 User image Matthew Tuck [:CodeMachine] 2001-07-27 10:56:00 PDT
I'm not sure about this request, but it may just be inertia - I can't think of
any reason not to do it.

Currently there's a field called "Priority, status, severity, and milestone
changes" on e-mail prefs.  If we did this we'd need to change this to include
Comment 5 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2001-07-29 22:41:47 PDT
I'd just change the wording on the existing option.  For purposes of 
notifications a resolution change should be considered a status change.
Comment 6 User image Diego Biurrun 2001-08-11 20:23:41 PDT
See also bug 87840, which is about changing the duplication target, so it's a
special case of this bug.
Comment 7 User image Andreas Franke (gone) 2001-09-01 13:51:00 PDT
-> Bugzilla product, Changing Bugs component, reassigning.
Comment 8 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2001-11-17 18:09:53 PST
We are currently trying to wrap up Bugzilla 2.16.  We are now close enough to
release time that anything that wasn't already ranked at P1 isn't going to make
the cut.  Thus this is being retargetted at 2.18.  If you strongly disagree with
this retargetting, please comment, however, be aware that we only have about 2
weeks left to review and test anything at this point, and we intend to devote
this time to the remaining bugs that were designated as release blockers.
Comment 9 User image Matthew Tuck [:CodeMachine] 2002-04-20 19:22:28 PDT
*** Bug 136631 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2002-11-26 00:16:27 PST
*** Bug 179104 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2003-01-03 20:03:39 PST
*** Bug 187640 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 12 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2004-03-14 23:21:48 PST
Enhancements which don't currently have patches on them which are targetted at
2.18 are being retargetted to 2.20 because we're about to freeze for 2.18. 
Consideration will be taken for moving items back to 2.18 on a case-by-case
basis (but is unlikely for enhancements)
Comment 13 User image Dave Miller [:justdave] ( 2004-09-18 17:41:43 PDT
Bugzilla 2.20 feature set is now frozen as of 15 Sept 2004.  Anything flagged
enhancement that hasn't already landed is being pushed out.  If this bug is
otherwise ready to land, we'll handle it on a case-by-case basis, please set the
blocking2.20 flag to '?' if you think it qualifies.
Comment 14 User image Olav Vitters 2005-05-27 10:36:03 PDT
*** Bug 295724 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 15 User image Olav Vitters 2005-05-27 10:39:05 PDT
*** Bug 285540 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 16 User image Frédéric Buclin 2005-11-11 02:31:22 PST
I'll take it as soon as we unfreeze if nobody else wants to. I want it in 2.24.
Comment 17 User image Frédéric Buclin 2006-03-11 13:28:20 PST
Created attachment 214790 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1
Comment 18 User image Teemu Mannermaa (:wicked) 2006-03-14 00:44:20 PST
Comment on attachment 214790 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

This block from CheckCanChangeField() should be dealt with too:
    # A resolution change is always accompanied by a status change. So, we
    # always OK resolution changes; if they really can't do this, we will
    # notice it when status is checked.
    if ($field eq "resolution") {
        return 1;

>Index: process_bug.cgi
>-    /^resolve$/ && CheckonComment( "resolve" ) && do {
>+    /^(resolve|change_resolution)$/ && CheckonComment( "resolve" ) && do {

Shouldn't use commentonresolve to mandate a comment when change_resolution is done because we are not actually resolving the bug anymore. Maybe add a commentonchangeresolution parameter?

>-        # Check here, because its the only place we require the resolution
>         check_field('resolution', scalar $cgi->param('resolution'),
>                     \@::settable_resolution);

Nit: Why remove the comment? Isn't it still valid?

>-        # Make sure the bug is not already marked as a dupe
>-        # (may appear in race condition)
>-        my $dupe_of =
>-            $dbh->selectrow_array("SELECT dupe_of FROM duplicates
>-                                   WHERE dupe = ?",
>-                                   undef, $cgi->param('id'));
>-        if ($dupe_of) {
>-            ThrowUserError("dupe_entry_found", { dupe_of => $dupe_of });
>-        }
>+        # If the bug was already marked as a duplicate, remove
>+        # the existing entry.
>+        $dbh->do('DELETE FROM duplicates WHERE dupe = ?',
>+                  undef, $cgi->param('id'));

This change is alarming. Bug state shouldn't be changed at this stage because a) it won't be logged and b) the script could still end with an error.
Comment 19 User image Frédéric Buclin 2006-03-14 13:31:40 PST
Created attachment 215053 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v2
Comment 20 User image Teemu Mannermaa (:wicked) 2006-03-26 16:33:08 PST
Comment on attachment 215053 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v2

>Index: process_bug.cgi
>-    /^resolve$/ && CheckonComment( "resolve" ) && do {
>+    /^(resolve|change_resolution)$/ && CheckonComment( "resolve" ) && do {

Nit: I still think a separate param would be better.

Looks like dupe_of changes are not logged in the activity log nor bugmailed about. This seems to happen even before this patch so I won't hold review for that. Although, one would have seen the change to REOPEN and then to RESOLVED DUPLICATE again previously. Resolution changes themself are logged and bugmailed about correctly.

There will be multiple duplicate notations but that's a different problem too. We should really stop doing these comments and simply show duplication states in the bug info.
Comment 21 User image Frédéric Buclin 2006-03-27 14:26:06 PST
Checking in process_bug.cgi;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/process_bug.cgi,v  <--  process_bug.cgi
new revision: 1.310; previous revision: 1.309
Checking in template/en/default/bug/knob.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/bug/knob.html.tmpl,v  <--  knob.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.20; previous revision: 1.19
Checking in template/en/default/global/user-error.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/global/user-error.html.tmpl,v  <--  user-error.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.162; previous revision: 1.161
Comment 22 User image Max Kanat-Alexander 2006-09-07 17:55:20 PDT
Added to relnotes in bug 349423. Please let me know if I missed any critical information about this bug in the release notes.
Comment 23 User image Frédéric Buclin 2011-02-05 13:55:40 PST
Created attachment 510051 [details] [diff] [review]
selenium test, v1

Committing to: bzr+ssh://
modified t/test_bug_edit.t
Committed revision 175.

Committing to: bzr+ssh://
modified t/test_bug_edit.t
Committed revision 146.

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