[Tracker-discuss] Reminder: please review tracker schema !
g.brandl at gmx.net
Thu Nov 30 22:54:29 CET 2006
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Erik Forsberg wrote:
>> "Paul Dubois" <pfdubois at gmail.com> writes:
>>>> When one thinks about roundup users you need to remember that web interface
>>>> use will be small compared to email. This remark applies to items in the
>>>> schema, such as component or version or platform -- the email user will not
>>>> be setting these. They need 'not set' defaults so that a developer doing
>>>> triage can set them later.
>>>> The problem with the patch attached business is that many will submit the
>>>> patch by email attachment and they won't see any checkbox to check. Yes,
>>>> they could do it on the title line as in
>> I suggest that we add a "has patch" (or perhaps "has attachement")
>> property (boolean) on issue, and set it by detector. That way, it will
>> be easy (and efficient) to search for issues that have
>> attachements. Still, the users don't need to do anything, as it
>> happens automatically.
> What does that flag tell us that we couldn't find with a (named) query ?
> How does the detector distinguish between a patch and some other attachment,
> such as a stack trace, or other log ?
In an ideal world, it could look at the file extension which would have to be
.patch or .diff. Unfortunately, we frequently get patches that end in .txt or
don't have an extension at all.
> The point is that someone needs to triage 'manually', at some point.
> Either the submitter, when setting that flag, or the assignee, when reviewing
> the attachment.
Which is reasonable, IMHO. Someone needs to read and probably reclassify the
More information about the Tracker-discuss