I have modified the buglist.cgi to output XML. I am attaching the patch. Adding xmlout=1 to the URL (buglist.cgi?xmlout=1) the result will be xml.

marking as possible inclusion into 2.12

Namachi: Any chance of getting this patch reposted as a unified (-u) diff? There's already been enough changes to buglist.cgi since this patch was posted that it's too stale to apply without context. cvs -z3 diff -u buglist.cgi

I am in the process moving back to MountainView,CA. I will post the new version next week.( I don't have the machine with me).

any eta on getting this patch updated?

reassigning to shiva since we're waiting on him

endico -- namachi doesn't have write access, and you know more about xml than I do. Could you review this and either commit or post-2.12 it?

I am moving this to post 2.12, no response.

moving to real milestones...

IMHO, this really isn't the right way to do this; it should be done with the perl XML libraries. If I submitted a patch that used those, would it be accepted? Or is adding another dependency verboten?

-> Bugzilla product, Query component.

This can be done using new templates, right? :-) I'm beginning to think that templates are the answer to everything... Gerv

Yeah, the best way to do this ATM would be to use the template stuff. Do you have patches for that yet, Gerv?

Myk is templatising buglist.cgi. Gerv

We are currently trying to wrap up Bugzilla 2.16. We are now close enough to release time that anything that wasn't already ranked at P1 isn't going to make the cut. Thus this is being retargetted at 2.18. If you strongly disagree with this retargetting, please comment, however, be aware that we only have about 2 weeks left to review and test anything at this point, and we intend to devote this time to the remaining bugs that were designated as release blockers.

Is this the same as #110770?

*** Bug 110770 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

The fix for bug 103778 will make the fix for this one trivial (although it will require a new patch). Making that bug block this one.

The templatized buglist.cgi (bug 103778) has been checked in. It includes RDF output (&format=rdf), which is well-formed XML. Does that resolve this bug, or is there a need for some different flavor of XML?

Myk: from where I stand, I think the question is 'how complete is the RDF'? Does it have all fields available via the standard interface? If so, then I'd think that this is complete. [Also, doesn't having RDF close out 82878?]

The RDF version does indeed include all the fields available via the HTML interface, but it isn't valid RSS, since RSS is a very specific dialect of RDF. The templatization fix makes in very easy to add RSS support, however.

OK, I'm closing this, based on the exchange between Myk and I some time ago. Please reopen if I'm overstepping my bounds :)