Mailing List Archive: CustomFieldGroupings

CustomFieldGroupings

Nov 20, 2014, 11:34 PM

Post #1 of 5 (1356 views)

Hi,

is it really intended that CustomFieldGroupings don't respect the CF
name case [1]?

Example:
* create CF "name"
* create CF "NAME"
* put this in RT_Site_Config.pm:
Set(%CustomFieldGroupings, 'RT::Ticket' => [ 'Test' => ['name'] ]);

The result is that both CF's appear in the "Test" grouping, which is
maybe not what the admin wanted.

I think it isn't the best way to use the CF name as identifier for
CustomFieldGroupings. Except the above example, it is currently not
possible to have two CF's with the same name and put only one of them in
a CustomFieldGrouping.

A better way would be to use the CF id as the identifier.
This also would have the benefit that CF name changes wouldn't affect
the CustomFieldGroupings. Maybe this would be also better for sites with
many CF's as RT::CustomFields->LimitToGrouping() would limit on the id
instead of the (not indexed) name column.

Chris

[1]
https://github.com/bestpractical/rt/blob/stable/lib/RT/CustomFields.pm#L116-155

Re: CustomFieldGroupings [ In reply to ]

elacour at easter-eggs

Nov 21, 2014, 12:46 AM

Post #2 of 5 (1344 views)

Permalink

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 08:34:29AM +0100, Christian Loos wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it really intended that CustomFieldGroupings don't respect the CF
> name case [1]?
>
> Example:
> * create CF "name"
> * create CF "NAME"
> * put this in RT_Site_Config.pm:
> Set(%CustomFieldGroupings, 'RT::Ticket' => [ 'Test' => ['name'] ]);
>
> The result is that both CF's appear in the "Test" grouping, which is
> maybe not what the admin wanted.
>
> I think it isn't the best way to use the CF name as identifier for
> CustomFieldGroupings. Except the above example, it is currently not
> possible to have two CF's with the same name and put only one of them in
> a CustomFieldGrouping.
>
> A better way would be to use the CF id as the identifier.
>

who is going to like using numerical identifiers in configuration?

better to:

- fix the query to be case sensitive (even I don't think many people
use multiple CF with only case changes within the same queue). It's a
bug imho.
- allow to do per queue grouping (this is a must have, a ticket is
already open for this)

--
Easter-eggs Spécialiste GNU/Linux
44-46 rue de l'Ouest - 75014 Paris - France - Métro Gaité
Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37 - Fax: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 76
mailto:elacour@easter-eggs.com - http://www.easter-eggs.com

Re: CustomFieldGroupings [ In reply to ]

cloos at netcologne

Nov 21, 2014, 1:46 AM

Post #3 of 5 (1341 views)

Permalink

Am 21.11.2014 um 09:46 schrieb Emmanuel Lacour:
> who is going to like using numerical identifiers in configuration?
Me! ;-)
Currently changing a CF name used in CustomFieldGroupings is a 2 step
process:
* change CF name in the WebUI
* change CustomFieldGroupings in RT_SiteConfig.pm
As this are total different places this may lead that the latter one
will be forgotten.

>
> better to:
>
> - fix the query to be case sensitive (even I don't think many people
> use multiple CF with only case changes within the same queue). It's a
> bug imho.
> - allow to do per queue grouping (this is a must have, a ticket is
> already open for this)
Great. Can someone add me to ticket #30489.
Maybe, if I have time , I will send a PR to have this in RT 4.4.

For RT 4.6 we should put a "CF Grouping WebUI" on the wish list. :-)

Chris

Re: CustomFieldGroupings [ In reply to ]

elacour at easter-eggs

Nov 21, 2014, 2:21 AM

Post #4 of 5 (1341 views)

Permalink

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:46:16AM +0100, Christian Loos wrote:
> Am 21.11.2014 um 09:46 schrieb Emmanuel Lacour:
> > who is going to like using numerical identifiers in configuration?
> Me! ;-)
> Currently changing a CF name used in CustomFieldGroupings is a 2 step
> process:
> * change CF name in the WebUI
> * change CustomFieldGroupings in RT_SiteConfig.pm
> As this are total different places this may lead that the latter one
> will be forgotten.
>

I agree, thought, you can mind of changing a grouping also needs now to
steps, a first one to find the ID of the CF.

But seriously, I think that BPS will agree to stay with name as this is
more consistent, think about other configuration variables, they all use
object names, not id ... fortunatly.

> >
> Great. Can someone add me to ticket #30489.

I added you as a Cc on this ticket.

> Maybe, if I have time , I will send a PR to have this in RT 4.4.
>

you're welcome :)

--
Easter-eggs Spécialiste GNU/Linux
44-46 rue de l'Ouest - 75014 Paris - France - Métro Gaité
Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37 - Fax: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 76
mailto:elacour@easter-eggs.com - http://www.easter-eggs.com

Re: CustomFieldGroupings [ In reply to ]

alexmv at bestpractical

Nov 24, 2014, 9:08 AM

Post #5 of 5 (1331 views)

Permalink

On 11/21/2014 05:21 AM, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:46:16AM +0100, Christian Loos wrote:
>> Am 21.11.2014 um 09:46 schrieb Emmanuel Lacour:
>>> who is going to like using numerical identifiers in configuration?
>> Me! ;-)
>> Currently changing a CF name used in CustomFieldGroupings is a 2 step
>> process:
>> * change CF name in the WebUI
>> * change CustomFieldGroupings in RT_SiteConfig.pm
>> As this are total different places this may lead that the latter one
>> will be forgotten.
>>
>
>
> I agree, thought, you can mind of changing a grouping also needs now to
> steps, a first one to find the ID of the CF.
>
> But seriously, I think that BPS will agree to stay with name as this is
> more consistent, think about other configuration variables, they all use
> object names, not id ... fortunatly.

Making the configuration take either name or ID should be relatively
straightforward, and I don't see any obvious drawbacks to doing so.

>> Great. Can someone add me to ticket #30489.
>
> I added you as a Cc on this ticket.

The biggest complexity to per-queue grouping configuration is the
configuration itself; it cries out more for a web-based configuration UI
as well.
- Alex