Closed Bug 653597 Opened 14 years ago Closed 10 years ago

Reports with "Real Name" fields use foo_real_name in the url parameters for linked queries

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Reporting/Charting, defect, P2)

defect

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 4.4

People

(Reporter: stas, Assigned: mail)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

When one of the axes is "Assignee Real Name", the queries linked from the bug counts contain "&assigned_to_realname" which is ignored by Bugzilla.
Version: unspecified → 4.0
Priority: -- → P2
Summary: assigned_to_realname is ignored in the query → Reports with "Real Name" fields use foo_real_name in the url parameters for linked queries
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 4.0
Target Milestone: Bugzilla 4.0 → Bugzilla 4.2
Bugzilla 4.2 is now restricted to security fixes only.
Target Milestone: Bugzilla 4.2 → ---
So I'm thinking the best way to fix this bug, is to add (assigned_to|qa_contact|reporter|cc)_realname as fielddefs and modifying Bugzilla::Search to handle this. Bugzilla::Search at the moment ignores the _realname values because they aren't fields (as per_parse_basic_fields). This has the add benefit of allowing these fields to be shown in the custom search section. Thoughts? Objections?
Assignee: charting → sgreen
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: needinfo?
Flags: needinfo?
Flags: needinfo?(justdave)
sounds good to me.
Flags: needinfo?(justdave)
I'll work on a patch sometime in the next fortnight.
Attached patch v1 patch (deleted) — Splinter Review
Okay so it took a little more than a fortnight to do :)
Attachment #826542 - Flags: review?(gerv)
Apologies for the delay in doing this review. A few things confuse me. I'm not sure what this patch actually does. The initial bug report suggested that the Reports had an option to have Real Names as one of the axes but when one did that, the clickable searches were incorrect. However, I see no such option, with or without the patch. Comment 6 then suggests that the fix Simon was planning to do would also allow Real Names to appear in advanced search - by which I assume he means Boolean Charts. But when you apply the patch, they are not there. Simon: can you explain the intended effect of this patch, and how it addresses the issue in comment 0? Thanks, Gerv
(In reply to Gervase Markham [:gerv] from comment #11) > I'm not sure what this patch actually does. The initial bug report suggested > that the Reports had an option to have Real Names as one of the axes but > when one did that, the clickable searches were incorrect. However, I see no > such option, with or without the patch. Take this link (from BMO) as an example: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=bug_status&y_axis_field=assigned_to_realname&z_axis_field=&query_format=report-table&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=Bugzilla&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&longdesc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_id=&bug_id_type=anyexact&votes=&votes_type=greaterthaneq&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailqa_contact2=1&emailtype2=exact&email2=&emailtype3=substring&email3=&chfieldvalue=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&j_top=AND&f1=noop&o1=noop&v1=&format=table&action=wrap The y axis field is the 'Assignee Real Name', if you click on one of the links inside the table (e.g. the '9' in the UNCONFIRMED/Bugzilla Documentation Team (you?)' cell, you will see that it returns 155 bugs. The number of bugs returned is the same as the total in the last row, since no filtering is done on the assignee's real name. > Comment 6 then suggests that the fix Simon was planning to do would also > allow Real Names to appear in advanced search - by which I assume he means > Boolean Charts. I did. > But when you apply the patch, they are not there. Did you run checksetup.pl. As the new fields are added to the fielddefs table, you'll need to run checksetup.pl for the changes to take effect. > Simon: can you explain the intended effect of this patch, and how it > addresses the issue in comment 0? If you are still having issue after running checksetup, let me know. -- simon
Comment on attachment 826542 [details] [diff] [review] v1 patch Review of attachment 826542 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Not running checksetup must have been my problem. Gerv
Attachment #826542 - Flags: review?(gerv) → review+
Flags: approval?
Since this is a bug in production, I'd like it to be considered for 4.4 too. FWIW, brc have been running this code in production for a while now.
Flags: approval4.4?
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval4.4?
Flags: approval4.4+
Flags: approval+
To ssh://gitolite3@git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git f1a0dec..d771ac8 master -> master
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 4.4
Blocks: 175895
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: