Allow Lithium SUMO content to be added as "see also" field in Bugzilla. Ideally all such content should be valid. After all if someone wants to file a bug about sumo Lithium they may wish to link to relevant parts as a see also. Previously I think we could add most if not all Kitsune Sumo links to bugs. I will use comments in this bug to test what can be added. I do already know that rather oddly a link to the Sumo Lithium contribs forum generates an error so but then is included. I am making this new rather than unconfirmed. Example Post by: Sumo Admin Madalina Section: SUMO community discussions ( https://support.mozilla.org/t5/SUMO-community-discussions/bd-p/contributors ) Thread title: New Bugzilla Components ( https://support.mozilla.org/t5/SUMO-community-discussions/New-Bugzilla-Components/m-p/1370269 ) This will need a Bugzilla bug filing but I will test out here first. Once a bugzilla bug is filed and confirmed this may be marked as a duplicate. This is giving an error an I have to press back to proceed. Adding a screenshot of the error message. Adding the link as a URL instead. Will try a sumo lithium AAQ post next

I just tried a Lithium Sumo support question. The warning says > ... See Also URLs should point to one of: ... > * A question on support.mozilla.org Example Section: en-us Firefox Support ( https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Firefox/bd-p/Privacy-Security) {despite the url that is the all Firefox section) Thread: [BUG] [Windows] [e10s] Unable to open ... ( https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Firefox/BUG-Windows-e10s-Unable-to-open-attachments-from-Windows-Mail/m-p/1370319#U1370319 ) Again it warns it is invalid. It would not post. But that is a current question on support.mozilla.org - our new post-Kitsune Lithium software. I will also have a go with KB links. Note we now have a current component for KB content so it would be helpful to link to KB content using "Also See" and out of curiosity an old style KB link.

Does not accept Kitsune KB links or Lithium KB links. I will confirm this bug.

This is Bugzilla issue, Emma under which component should we file this?

NI Madalina I think it also needs Sumo input and decisions in order to file a correct bug, rather than just moving this bug I think we would want to link to AAQ support questions. Those are analogous to bug reports in that product end users will report their Crashes or other problems there. If we ever get parity with Kitsune it will also be collecting some of the end users users System Device and Product information automatically or semi automatically and that is useful in bug reports. I think for a similar reason we need to be able to link to the contributors etc discussion threads. Those will hold information on KB article discussions and edits and on Lithium product problems a requests. We of course run sumo as a Lithium Product now, and KB articles including those linked to or from other Mozilla sites and even in product linked articles are now Lithium. Sumo Lithium as support.mozilla.org - Lithium is a product with components including KB content and Lithium UX. Recent changes include bug 1343105 & bug 1349334 Potentially we may also require the ability to link to Lithium's own Bug System see for instance bug1341574 comment8 > We met with Lithium's support representative yesterday and we are going to decide how to handle bugs and feature requests > - and share this information with you - in the coming days. Lithium Bug content is quoted in a Sumo bugs and those may in turn be directly affecting other Mozilla Bugs. I do recall Rolland recently extensively quoting Lithium case comments, and thinking in it was a great job of keeping Sumo updated, but also thinking it would be much better and easier to be able to post links, unfortunately I do not recall which bug that was.

(In reply to John Hesling [:John99] (NeedInfo me) from comment #5) > NI Madalina > I think it also needs Sumo input and decisions in order to file a correct > bug, rather than just moving this bug Let's have one bug for bugzilla recognize the Lithium links, if there are other types of links needed, that should be in a separate bug. For now, limiting the scope of this to just the see also field and Lithium bugs will get this resolved faster. When does SUMO need this work completed so I can prioritize?

Thanks for the reply Emma IMHO you have no need to prioritise this highly, as it is relatively trivial and not very important. It will be an Enhancement not a Need. Not my decision to make, although I am happy to make suggestions. We have not even sorted out the bug reporting protocols and procedures for Lithium Sumo yet { See for instance bug 1341574 & bug 1349334 )I would therefore reason that this is low priority for Sumo as we have much bigger issues to sort out, {e.g. bug 1324426 ) and so does not need you to prioritise it. You want an actual time frame? I would venture to suggest within 6 month would be great, but if it takes a couple of years we would still be grateful.

Madalina, I had intended to NI you earlier from comment 5 on but obviously forgot to so adding NI now.