This creates a warning message when one creates an attachment,
informing of KDE's use of Phabricator to submit patches, and to not
submit a patch through Bugzilla.
Per request of T6832.
Details
Details
- Reviewers
ngraham bcooksley - Group Reviewers
Sysadmin - Commits
- R895:e332a7ae3194: Create attachment warning for patches.
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- R895 Customised Bugzilla for bugs.kde.org
- Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable. - Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.
Comment Actions
The text is current set to be italicized ("emphasized"). Not sure if you'd prefer bold, or what. Let me know if you want a change.
Comment Actions
Rather than using a hard do not submit patches here perhaps it might be better to say that Bugzilla is not monitored actively for patches, and that any patches uploaded here will be missed?
Comment Actions
I would change "may be missed" to "is likely to be missed" to add a bit more certainty to it, since in point of fact, the patch is indeed likely to be missed judging by historical trends.
Comment Actions
OK, actually simulating this for a user workflow, I think we need more changes to get the point across:
- On the main page, we should change "Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)" to "Add an attachment (screenshot of the issue, test case, etc.)"
- On the patch submission page, we should remove all references to the attachment being a possible patch.
Basically, this is a good start but not enough: if we don't want people to submit patches on Bugzilla, we shouldn't make it look like we've gone out of our way to explicitly encourage and support that in the attachment UX.
Comment Actions
+1, though I can't really test this. :) I'll defer to Sysadmin for code review here regarding the section that touches scripts.
Comment Actions
This looks fine as far as I can tell.
If memory serves checkboxes only result in data being sent when they're checked, so this change should be totally safe.