Bug 78688

Summary:	Bug number auto-hyperlinking is too simple
Product:	[Community] Bugzilla	Reporter:	Michael Lee Yohe <michael>
Component:	Bugzilla General	Assignee:	David Lawrence <dkl>
Status:	CLOSED UPSTREAM	QA Contact:	David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	2.18	CC:	aleksey
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-04-11 04:15:16 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 Michael Lee Yohe 2002-11-27 17:05:28 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 Galeon/1.2.6 (X11; Linux i686; U;) Gecko/20020830

Description of problem:
Red Hat's Bugzilla seems to only recognize one style of an embedded bug numbers
for auto-hyperlinking.  While many people specify "Bug <number>", there are
quite a few (including Red Hat employees) which specify an alternative format
that is not recognized as an embedded Bug Number.

See "Expected Results" for examples.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Browse the bugs in Red Hat's Bugzilla.
2. Browse the bugs in Mozilla's Bugzilla.
	

Actual Results:  Red Hat's Bugzilla only recognizes "Bug <number>" format.

Expected Results:  Red Hat's Bugzilla should recognize quite a few formats
(through simple regex additions):

Bug <number>
Bug #<number>
Bug<number>
Bug#<number>
Bugs <number>, <number>
Bugs #<number>, #<number>
Bug ID <number>
Bug ID #<number>
et. al.

Additional info:

Comment 1 David Lawrence 2002-11-27 18:08:30 UTC

Let's see:

Bug 78688
Bug #78688
Bug78688
Bug#78688
Bugs 78688, 34222
Bugs #78688, #34222
Bug ID 78688
Bug ID #78688

Comment 2 David Lawrence 2002-11-27 18:09:47 UTC

The new bugzilla system also does hyperlinking to the same extent so I will need
to pass this change upstream to the core developers.

Comment 3 Michael Lee Yohe 2002-12-13 22:23:46 UTC

Well, the "new" 2.17.1 release (from 2.8 ... very interesting) seems to capture
more auto-linking than the previous Bugzilla.  But I don't understand why "Bug
ID <number>" is captured but "Bug ID #<number>" is not.  Since I have not delved
into the source code of Bugzilla - can't you add templates for the auto-linking?

Bug match = Bug, Bug #, Bugs, Bugs #, Bug ID, Bug ID #
Buglist match = #,+# (or something horked up like that).

**shrug**

Comment 4 Aleksey Nogin 2002-12-14 21:07:34 UTC

Buglist:
bugs 123 and 456
bugs 123, 456 and 789

Comment 5 David Lawrence 2006-04-08 17:42:38 UTC

Red Hat's current Bugzilla version is 2.18. I am moving all older open bugs to
this version. Any bugs against the older versions will need to be verified that
they are still bugs. This will help me also to sort them better.

Comment 6 Aleksey Nogin 2006-04-08 18:47:55 UTC

Still there (see comment #2 and comment #4).

Comment 7 David Lawrence 2006-04-11 04:15:16 UTC

I have updated the section of code responsible for linking to the latest from
upstream BZ which should help a little. Any other linking misses should be filed
in a bug report at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org.