Bug 212492
Summary: | Display warning page if dup bug has different project, version, or component fields | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Community] Bugzilla | Reporter: | Prarit Bhargava <prarit> |
Component: | Bugzilla General | Assignee: | Matt Tyson 🤬 <mtyson> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | tools-bugs <tools-bugs> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | devel | CC: | jfearn, jingwang, roland |
Target Milestone: | 4.2-7 | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Regression, Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | 4.2.4-7 | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-12-07 00:44:01 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Prarit Bhargava
2006-10-27 00:12:39 UTC
After haranguing Prarit, I was just going to file this same RFE wrt differing Product fields, or even just specific prohibition on Fedora vs RHEL matching since RHEL Beta vs RHEL product is often valid (as is Fedora N vs Fedora devel version fields sometimes). >or even just specific prohibition on Fedora vs RHEL matching
I'm not so sure that works. There are times when RHEL-devel == Fedora-devel and
we do dup bugs against each other. A prohibition is probably too strong -- I
think a loud warning would suffice and a "Are you really sure you want to do
this?" button would be nice :)
P.
Is this enhancement still wanted? -- simon (In reply to comment #4) > Is this enhancement still wanted? > Yes, I think it is still a good idea. We still occasionally have engineers who accidentally do this. P. (In reply to comment #5) > Yes, I think it is still a good idea. We still occasionally have engineers who > accidentally do this. Fair enough. It will be a warning page rather than a complete block. There should be a preference to disable this warning if a user doesn't want it. This feature should be added to a major release so that time can be provided to warn users of the change in functionality. Moving to the next release as this wasn't completed on time for release 5. -- simon Turns out this part wasn't implemented "There should be a preference to disable this warning if a user doesn't want it.". There was also a bug which QE identified today as well ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877547#c5 ) -- simon Two things need to be fixed as part of release 7. 1) On the warning page, the links to the bug numbers are not valid. 2) You don't need a separate parameter section for this, it should be in the 'Bug Change Policies' section. |