Bug 644885
| Summary: | Migration of Jira security restrictions should be maintained | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Community] Bugzilla | Reporter: | Mike Clark <miclark> |
| Component: | Bugzilla General | Assignee: | Simon Green <sgreen> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Jiri Pechanec <jpechane> |
| Severity: | urgent | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 3.6 | CC: | ebaak, kbaker, mharvey, sgreen |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-05-11 03:37:02 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 583097 | ||
|
Description
Mike Clark
2010-10-20 14:46:01 UTC
Hi Mike, Can you please give me an example of a JIRA issue (that is going to be migrated) that has this flag set. Unfortunately the bug numbers above will no longer be valid. -- simon Hi Simon, Here's one example: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBPAPP-5657 Security Level:: JBoss Internal (Only JBoss employees and contractors) Unfortunately, I could not figure out how to query Jira on the "Security Level" field. There's probably a way...I just was unable to figure it out. The decision was made to just set the permission to "internal" for all Jira's on the list that Simon generated that will be migrated to bz. Note: Many of the Jira's on the list were "project" jiras, not "product" jiras. Hi Simon, Do you still need me to review this patch? I see it was already pushed in the bugzilla Jira release, not sure why is it still ON_QA? Thanks, Noura Currently verified on one private issue. I have requested sample of Jiras to cover all security levels so I'll continue with the verification on Monday. (In reply to comment #12) > Hi Simon, > > Do you still need me to review this patch? Yes please. > I see it was already pushed in the > bugzilla Jira release, not sure why is it still ON_QA? While the code is live, since it is an import issue it requires that the JBoss team verify that the change works as expected. -- simon Expected private issues - 10030, 10052, 10074, 10085, 10010, 10040, 10050, 10051, 10054, 10086 PASSED 10053 JBNADM-3674 - public 10010 JBPAPP-4267 - private 10020 JBPAPP-4515 - public 10030 JBPAPP-4505 - private 10040 JBPAPP-4484 - private 10081 JBEPP-388 - public 10085 JBEPP-359 - private 10086 JBEPP-385 - private FAILED 10050 JBNADM-622 - public 10052 JBNADM-3687 - public 10054 JBNADM-3338 - public Cannot verify due to non-supported or non-existing cases 10071 CDITCK-168 10074 WBTCK-39 10051 No issue exists Expected private issues - 10030, 10052, 10074, 10085, 10010, 10040, 10050, 10051, 10054, 10086 PASSED 10053 JBNADM-3674 - public 10010 JBPAPP-4267 - private 10020 JBPAPP-4515 - public 10030 JBPAPP-4505 - private 10040 JBPAPP-4484 - private 10081 JBEPP-388 - public 10085 JBEPP-359 - private 10086 JBEPP-385 - private 10050 JBNADM-622 - private 10052 JBNADM-3687 - private 10054 JBNADM-3338 - private Cannot verify due to non-supported or non-existing cases 10071 CDITCK-168 10074 WBTCK-39 10051 No issue exists Private comments - FAILED See SOA-2160 - it contains comments with restricted visibility but the setting is not migrated to Bugzilla Marking as ON_QA for testing. This change went live some time last year. -- simon |